Your New Scoop Site

Welcome to Scoop!

To help you figure things out, there is a Scoop Admin Guide which can hopefully answer most of your questions.

Some tips:

Most of the layout is changed in "Blocks", found in the admin tools menu
Features can be turned on and off, and configured, in "Site Controls" in the admin tools menu
Stories have an "edit" link right beside the "Full Story" link on an index page, and right beside the "Post a Comment" link on the full story page. They can also be edited by clicking the story title in the "Story List" admin tool
Boxes are what allow you to write new features for Scoop; they require a knowledge of the perl programming language to work with effectively, although you can often make small changes without knowing much perl. If you would like a feature added but cannot program it yourself, ScoopHost does custom Scoop programming as one of its services.
If you aren't sure where to look for a particular feature or piece of display, try the "Search Admin Tools" link in the admin tools menu.

For support, questions, and general help with Scoop, email support@scoophost.com

ScoopHost.com is currently running Scoop version Undeterminable from .

Tag: Massachusetts Method

The NPVIC Will Rear It's Head . . . Again

By Kevin Rex Heine, Section News
Posted on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 11:53:30 PM EST
Tags: Electoral College, 3 USC § 1 & 7, quadrennial presidential elections, states vs. people balance, small states vs. large states balance, popular support vs. distributed support, U. S. Constitution Article 2 § 1 clauses 2 thru 4, U. S. Constitution Amendment XII, original intention, Massachusetts Method, Maine, Nebraska, Pennsylvania (pending), Ohio (pending), Virginia (pending), Wisconsin (pending), Michigan (pending), Florida (pending), potentially North Carolina, National Popular Vote is constitutionally irrelevant, Maryland (wants out), New Jersey (wants out), Illinois, Hawaii, Washington, Massachusetts, District of Columbia, Vermont, California, New York (not interested), Pennsylvania (not interested) (all tags)

Today, for those paying attention, was a very important day in the timeline of the 2012 Presidential Election. Today, on the first Monday following the second Wednesday of December, at such place and time as determined by the local legislature, the duly appointed and elected Presidential Electors met in their respective jurisdictions and cast their votes for President and Vice President of the United States - at least one of whom must not reside in the same jurisdiction as they do. Though the 51 jurisdictions do not appear to have reported yet, 27 of them are expected to cast their votes one way, and 24 of them are expected to cast their votes the other way.

And yet, for the past 41 days, perhaps because even as recently as the day before Election Day eleven states (at a total of 146 electoral votes) were considered to be in the "tossup" column, there has been considerable behind-the-scenes debate about a potential "reform" to the way that some states apportion their electoral votes, a reform that, had it been in place during this election, may have significantly impacted the outcome. Actually, instead of "reform" I should be referring to this as a "back to the basics" approach to the Electoral College.