From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Thu Mar 21 12:48:53 2002
Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31])
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2LCmqR27131
	for <suaaz@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:48:52 GMT
Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@agave [137.205.192.52])
	by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2LChtv19512;
	Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:43:55 GMT
Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daemon@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g2LCeP0K000909
	for <britdisc-outgoing@agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:40:25 GMT
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0/Submit) id g2LCePqg000908
	for britdisc-outgoing; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:40:25 GMT
Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@daffodil [137.205.192.30])
	by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g2LCeO0K000903
	for <britdisc-real@majordomo.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:40:24 GMT
Received: from pump3.york.ac.uk (pump3.york.ac.uk [144.32.128.131])
	by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2LCeJn04168
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:40:19 GMT
Received: from york.ac.uk (cst241.york.ac.uk [144.32.8.55])
	by pump3.york.ac.uk (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g2LCeAf07150
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:40:10 GMT
Message-ID: <3C99D4A9.690A9253@york.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:40:09 +0000
From: prw102 <prw102@york.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
CC: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Shafted
References: <F13o0cfshO2NSEwiGvT00012d78@hotmail.com> <E16o0WN-0003cu-00@pp.dundee.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk


hello,

as far as i can see, some people are saying:
1. maybe we should allocate qualification spots based on recent
performance

and some are retorting:
2. no...because you could have gone to whatever region you wished. 

well: why not just say that teams must make clear the region they will
be going to a few weeks in advance (and have a proper deadline). then
some bod can do the maths and allocate the qualifying spots based on
that information.

it seems clear to me that the spots must be allocated based on recent
performance. to see this just imagine if MHB, BAF, teamshark, yomama,
space monkeys, WYWLAS, SNOAP, and hammerage could all only go to the
midland region. if only 4 of them, say, could qualify, it would be a
farce. that is just the current situation taken to its logical
conclusion. 

reductio ad absurdum.
qed.

cheers,
Rodders/Pete
Space Monkeys, Chevron