Re: Result for vote regarding new members for the board of directors

>>>>> In article <20030223181209(dot)GA9735(at)gesundheit(dot)complete(dot)org>, John Goerzen <jgoerzen(at)complete(dot)org> writes:

> On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 10:21:18AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 04:24:29PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
>> > This omits a useful option. For instance, what if I do not feel
>> > that I know enough about a given candidate and wish to express
>> > no opinion whatsoever about that candidate?
>>
>> You rank the unknown ones above the 'none of the above', and the
>> known ones you absolutely don't want below the 'none of the
>> above'.

> No, because it would be implying a preference of the known ones
> over the unknown ones.

If you truly have no preference, why not lump all these
options at the same level above the default option? All are now
eligible, but you have expressed no preference, apart from saying I
find them acceptable.

If you don't even have an opinion on whether the options are
acceptable or not, I suggest you educate yourself; I would not want
to pander lazy exercise of ones franchise.

manoj
--
Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be
yours too." Dave Haynie
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta(at)acm(dot)org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C