Pierre van Rooden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >What exactly is the rational for candidates not being allowed to vote? > > It seemed logical that people over whom you vote do not vote themselves.
It does not seem logical to me, and anyhow is seem no rational, or at least no objective statement. > >I think choosing by lot is a bit unfair > > But a lot quicker. A second round would delay things again. So what. It is a once-a-year event only, a two week delay or so in the probably seldom occassion of a tie does not seem very important. You could also ask for the second vote immediately, by asking everyone to order all candidates in order of preference or something like that. Then it is probably also possible to work out which of the tieers is most popular, without new elections. > If there is no apparent choice because there are exactly enough > candidates to fill seats, there are not enough candidates for an election. > Trickly wording, eh? Er, you're right. Michiel -- Michiel Meeuwissen Mediapark C101 Hilversum +31 (0)35 6772979 nl_NL eo_XX en_US mihxil' [] ()
