On Mon, Jun 28, 1999 at 03:17:42PM -0700, Darren O. Benham wrote: > I agree with everything that Branden has said, up to this point. Here I > don't think that Phil's message was an accusation of impropriety but a > complaint of the whole process. If that is the case, then I apologize to Phil Hands for my defensiveness. While I may not personalize the outcome of the logo vote, I do personalize the process itself, because I've only been trying to do things as I understand the Constitution says they should be done. > Also, i think he (and anyone, including > someone in a position like DPL) has the right to suggest a vote and give > his reasons for that bvote. I agree, but campaigning makes me nervous. In binding together the issues of "vote this way" and "this whole vote is a sham" (or at least ill-conceived), I think he's encouraging people to think sloppily about the issue. I could be wrong though. I'm hardly an unbiased participant. Again, it's not the vote outcome that concerns me so much as criticisms of the process itself, which I take personally because it's this particular vote which is at issue. If Phil has a beef with the constitution itself, I think that could be discussed separately from the initimate details of this particular vote. -- G. Branden Robinson | A committee is a life form with six or Debian GNU/Linux | more legs and no brain. branden@ecn.purdue.edu | -- Robert Heinlein cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpFkREc_x6pa.pgp
Description: PGP signature