OK, it seems that there are no objections to using this list to organize a
statement. I think this would explain the connection to this list, but
explicitly disclaim being an official position of any persons or
organizations besides its signatories.
Here's the general points I'd like it to make:
On May 30, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
OK, it seems that there are no objections to using this list to
organize a statement. I think this would explain the connection to
this list, but explicitly disclaim being an official position of
any persons or organizations besides its
On 27.5.2011, at 10.01, Jameson Quinn wrote:
1. We draw up a statement which details the serious problems
with plurality in the US context, and states that there are
solutions.
Juho Laatu Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 9:43 PM
Good approach. I have one comment on the target statement.
On 29.5.2011, at 2.09, James Gilmour wrote:
On 27.5.2011, at 10.01, Jameson Quinn wrote:
1. We draw up a statement which details the serious problems
with plurality in the US context, and states that there are
solutions.
Juho Laatu Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 9:43 PM
Good approach. I
This thread, like this list, has two purposes - practical advocacy and
mathematical exploration.
On the practical advocacy front, I'd propose a process:
0. We discuss get some degree of informal consensus on this process itself -
I imagine it will take about a week, so say, before Sunday June
On 27.5.2011, at 10.01, Jameson Quinn wrote:
This thread, like this list, has two purposes - practical advocacy and
mathematical exploration.
One could divide the field also further by making a difference between 1)
practical advocacy, 2) practical exploration of real life examples, 3)
