voting

[zoe Lloyd]

Point taken and admonishment acknowleged... it just amazes
me that people don't read situations and then act
accordingly. When I read the original email requesting
votes I thought I bet some will reply to the full list
server, which doesn't fill me with confidence that full
attentiion will be paid to the said issue at vote.  Plus
one's vote being advertised and not kept personal only
serves as encouragement for others vote with the majority
or with the initial suggestions and adopt the status quo. I
wonder how many are just voting without paying full
attention to the legislature in hand; and is this not a
micro example of the wider political system?  I think so.
Zoe Lloyd.



On Fri, 3 May 2002 09:34:38 -0700 Lisa Camasi
<lcamasi at UCLINK4.BERKELEY.EDU> wrote:



> Let's see.  It's nearing the end of the semester here in the northern
> hemisphere, which means exams to prepare for and papers to
> write/evaluate.  It's well past the middle of the 1st term in the southern
> hemisphere too.  Most of us are busy, have a tremendous amount of
> administrative work to attend to and have lives away from our
> professional/academic responsibilities as well.  Such a minor oversight as
> hitting the 'reply' button hardly seems to warrant such a rude and arrogant
> indictment of a person's intelligence.  It must have taken more effort to
> write the post below than to just hit the 'delete' button the couple of
> times required!  As to the suggestion that ignorance somehow invalidate's
> one's vote, the 2000 presidential election here in the US provides rather
> robust evidence to the contrary.
>
> Lisa Camasi
>
>
> At 02:11 PM 5/3/2002 +0100, you wrote:
> >It does say in the text not to send your vote to the whole
> >mailing list : I don't particularly want my inbxo cluttered
> >with your votes: surewly list members are intelligent
> >enought to have read the message and realised this: this
> >display of ignorance doesn't give much validation to your
> >vote.  Zoe Lloyd.