Is this the vision of the MMC of the person writing this email?
It is teh vision of the vote-adminstrator (which does not necessarily need to be decisive, but hopefully it would be 'informed').
From the MMBase guidlines:
VETO : this is a veto, and means you will not accept the change. You need to explain why you VETO, and whether any change in the proposal will affect that vote. If you do not explain, your vote becomes an ABSTAIN. If the explanation is sound and there is no posibility of changing the proposal, the call fails.
Casting a VETO without sufficient motivation is a violation of the committor rules, and will be cause for a warning. A committor who abuses his rights and gets three warnings may loose his committor status (see Loosing Committor Status
> I
personally find a lack of explaination enough reason for for using a veto.
If there is a lack of explanation you are in your right to complain, and I would suggest to petition to hold the vote until full explanation is given. If discussion is needed a vote it is reasonable to put it on hold until opinions are clear. If needed the vote will be called again.
A VETO should be used once people DO realize what a vote means, so they can judge that a change has unacceptable results.
If the caller of the vote repeatedly refuses to explain or document his change, or refuses to provide sources, if needed, or if a request to hold the vote until explanations are given is not honored, you may likely resort to a VETO as a last resort.
Whimsically using a VETO to stop a vote because you do not at first understand the ramifications is, as written above, a violation of the rules..
-- Pierre van Rooden Mediapark, C 107 tel. +31 (0)35 6772815 "Never summon anything bigger than your head."
