Greg Stark <gsst...@mit.edu> wrote: > Kevin Grittner <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: >> Thanks for the examples. They did make me consider a real-life >> type of process which isn't currently implemented as a PostgreSQL >> function, but conceivably could be -- randomizing a pool of >> jurors to facilitate jury selection. My eyes are opened. :-) > > I'm not actually sure I follow what you're picturing. Well, to facilitate people's rights to a jury of their peers, we obtain lists of people in each county based on having a drivers license or state ID, being registered to vote, etc., then (after eliminating duplicates and those who have served on juries in recent years) we randomly select a subset, who get questionnaires, from which (at a later date) we randomly pick people to summon for jury a juror panel, from which (on each day they appear) we randomly select people for particular juries. Any flaw in the randomness of selection could constitute grounds for an appeal of the outcome of a case, so we have to be careful about process. (Randomness being defined as the properties that nobody with an interest in the case can control or predict who will be selected from one group into the next, and there is no bias on anything related to demographics, like age or last name [which could correlate with ethnicity]). Sounds like fun, eh? -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
