Angry grrls
Many people have read with dismay Anne Hyland's article about the Webgrrls (Online, April 27). For those at the meeting - for which there are transcripts - it all went rather differently.
Everyone reading the article will question a female writer who takes up a whole column to talk about a stray, rude man (there were actually two men at the meeting), using emotive language - "hijacked by an intelligent and eager young man", and incorrect English - "their male-exclusive networking meeting"!
The article gave Webgrrls some good coverage, but Hyland used jumped-up drama, leaving Webgrrls baffled at the description of themselves as women who "glare" and "become silent" in the presence of men. There's nothing like a good angle, but this is going too far, and proves that Webgrrls should retain its "female-exclusive" stance.
Lynn Robson
lynn@frognation.com
Your article Meet The Digital Divas contained many inaccuracies and, I feel, portrayed Webgrrls in a negative light. Far too much emphasis was placed on the behaviour of our ignorant interloper, to the detriment of the actual aims and objectives of our organisation. If you would like to include some more factual information in a future article, any of the committee members would be happy to oblige.
Catherine Pope
caterinep@iii.co.uk
Faking it
I have to take issue with two items in last week's Online (April 27). First, Nik Kraakenes letter about Online Caroline not being the first to make use of a "fake" web cam. He's quite right, and he accuses Freeserve of being behind with the game, but what he fails to understand is that on the internet - as in many areas of real life - being first is not what matters. Being first to draw something to the public's attention and getting all the publicity is more important.
Sure, it's nice to be first, but it's even better to be second and get all the publicity, web hits and possible funding from the publicity.
Second, the article on Webgrrls was very interesting but if I, or any other male, set up a group with a name like "weblokes" (or something equally silly) and said "no chicks please", we would be accused of being discriminatory. But when women do it, it's fair enough. Looks like sexual discrimination in cyberspace to me.
Craig McGill
craig@its-a-secret.demon.co.uk
Secret's out
Electronic voting and true online ballots offer far more opportunity for fraud (Click the vote, April 27). With traditional polling stations in relatively few locations, a proportion of the electorate can be asked outside the premises how they voted in independent counts, thereby providing a chance of identifying widely differing, autonomous and official figures. No such opportunity exists with predominantly home voting.
But far more alarming is businesses taking charge of ballot counting. Their owners are in it for personal gain, and therefore can never be relied upon to remain politically neutral.
For example, what if the little-known Socialist Party of Great Britain had a real chance of winning a general election? Their genuine socialism objective could mean ballot-counting company bosses losing very privileged lifestyles. The temptation to magic in and away digital data, with little prospect of discovery, could be considerable.
The then government may quietly encourage this due to there being "a threat to national security", or some other such justification, necessitating ballot tampering "for the sake of the nation".
To counter this, concerned electors with no objection could have their names, addresses and chosen candidates published on a website. If direct political material from other parties isn't wanted, a simple "No communication" marker could be included.
Secret digital ballots facilitate secret abuses of power. Max Hess
max@truesocialism.freeserve.co.uk
Interesting as it was, Patrick Barnham's article ignored the wider contexts beyond the virtual polling booth. More convenient ways of voting may have some short-term effect on turn-out, but technological exclusion and political indifference are far more pressing issues.
And if e-voting is to have any lasting impact, it has to be emphasised as a mere activity within a culture of e-participation and, indeed, "politeracy".
Perhaps then, we can begin to champion the democratic virtues of the virtual world.
Ian Parker
Social Market Foundation iparker@smf.co.uk
No answer
I presume Online is aware that the much advertised Lineone/Quip free call access is almost a non-answering service in the evenings, school holidays and at weekends. The internet service provider appears to have insufficient capacity to respond to attempted dialling. Thirty attempts is my record so far!
No problem with settings as morning response has been quick and in line with Lineone's previous excellent service.
Ken Sawyer
kennethsawyer@
lineone.net
