I abstain, and I truly abstain, because this informal vote is just a stunt to demonstrate a need for a preferential ballot. At the same time, I'd rather people come to next week's meeting armed with facts, not popular opinion polls.
As for preferential voting, I'm personally on board to use it; it's something I have wanted to implement here for a while. While I can't speak for them directly, I'm pretty sure I've managed to convince a few (not all) of the other directors with a couple of concise emails explaining how it works. On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Mark Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/24/12 15:04, Rylaan Gimby wrote: > >> Abstain. >> > > Readers should interpet all vocal abstains like this as "-1" -- as many > -1s on this question are an indication of the need a preferential ballot > right off the bat so that we can draw in the support of people who only > want to keep the space in reduced form and find it unacceptable to keep it > all. > > The only true abstain if you're neutral on the subject of broad acceptance > of the new terms regardless of configuration is to not reply. > > Remember, as a poll there isn't anything binding here -- but if many of us > answer it it gets some good numbers it will give us some indication of > where people are at before next week and has the potential to shape the > decision making process selected by the board. > > ______________________________**_________________ > SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List > Help: > http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/**index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss<http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss> > Archive: > https://groups.google.com/**group/skullspace-discuss-**archive/<https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/> >
_______________________________________________ SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/
