On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 10:27:00AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
In contrast, with an electronic vote that's open for an extended period
and for which quorum is calculated per-vote, classic quorum means it
may be in your best interest to *not* vote on a particular issue if
turnout is low, in
Hi,
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
I heard that new Australian citizens
are told that their two responsibilities as Australian citizens are
jury duty and voting.
No paying taxes? Cool! ;-)
I suppose it would be unworkable for Debian though.
Personally, I'd rather have ten voters who are
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 11:14:19PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 10:27:00AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
In contrast, with an electronic vote that's open for an extended period
and for which quorum is calculated per-vote, classic quorum means it
may be in your best
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 09:36:23 -0500
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 11:14:19PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Perhaps we could have compulsory voting then :-|
Why would rendering us unable to block a vote for lack of quorum be a
*good* thing? If I'm not
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 12:23:28PM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
Steve Langasek wrote:
Enforced voting in order to ensure quorum is precisely an outcome I
*don't* want. Lack of quorum indicates lack of interest in the issue,
and such a lack of interest should be given appropriate
Sam Hartman wrote:
John == John H Robinson, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John but is it a lack of interest in an issue at large, or a lack
John of interest in a particular response to an issue that you
John are worried about?
Before I thought about voting, I would have said
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 09:36:23 -0500
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 11:14:19PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Perhaps we could have compulsory voting then :-|
Why would rendering us unable to block a vote for lack of quorum be a
*good* thing? If I'm not
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 02:58:33AM +1000, Glenn McGrath wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 09:36:23 -0500
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 11:14:19PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Perhaps we could have compulsory voting then :-|
Why would rendering us unable to
John == John H Robinson, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John but is it a lack of interest in an issue at large, or a lack
John of interest in a particular response to an issue that you
John are worried about?
Before I thought about voting, I would have said lack of interest in
the
Sam Hartman wrote:
John == John H Robinson, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John but is it a lack of interest in an issue at large, or a lack
John of interest in a particular response to an issue that you
John are worried about?
Before I thought about voting, I would have said
Sam Hartman wrote:
John == John H Robinson, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John but is it a lack of interest in an issue at large, or a lack
John of interest in a particular response to an issue that you
John are worried about?
Before I thought about voting, I would have
Buddha == Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Buddha Sam Hartman wrote:
John == John H Robinson, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John but is it a lack of interest in an issue at large, or a lack
John of interest in a particular response to an issue that you
John
-wcxo4a1omaygu3.561r012qqwahn1.fcv7dm2z1tr563.cfup7ojs81sw-
Feel younger,
get rid of wrinkles, have more energy!
Find out more here!
Original Message
debian-vote@lists.debian.org wrote:
> Do you remember me?
13 matches
Mail list logo
