CNN iReport

After the votes are counted, NASA decided to just throw out the results and name it Tranquility???

When NASA held a popular vote to name the space station node, they didn't expect hundreds of thousands of write-in votes to name it Colbert.

I can sort of understand their opinion that their decision to allow write-in votes was dumb; they had no idea that there was any possibility that the people would actually vote for a cool name instead of one of the sorry excuses for a name that they officially let people vote for.

But they didn't even take the lame Serenity, which sounded more like a funeral home than a piece of a space station, that would have won if people hadn't written in their own choices, in the mistaken belief that their opinions acutally counted.

Instead, they completely dismissed the popular vote and named it 'Tranquility", which was even worse than any of the other lame names that those marketing geniuses could come up with.

\

If they were naming a graveyard, Tranquility might not be half bad.  If you're planning to build something which serves a function other than storing dead bodies, it's just not that great of a name.

It's almost as bad as Chevy marketing the Nova in Latin America a while back.  Unfortunately, their marketing geniuses never bothered  to realize that it translated to "No Go".  Which may have been pushing truth in advertising a little too far.

You would think that NASA would have the common sense to realize that if you allow people to vote on something, they will be royally ticked off if you just arrogantly show them that your opinion is something like "Well, we took your vote into consideration, but decided that the crummy excuse for a name that some bigwig here likes is going to be plastered on it, and you can all go jump in the lake".

That's OUR taxpayer dollars hard at work.

And we thought the bank executives were a bunch of arrogant SOBs who didn't have a clue.