Re: [ga] Ballot discussion

[Dan Steinberg <synthesis@videotron.ca>]

I actually think we have had plenty of discussion on the merits. It was
just disguised as procedural.

After all when you think of it, what is procedure but a bunch of generic
merits, tested and true, distilled down into a rule? And every time you
wish to apply that rule you have to assert that it is applicable by
applying those pesky things called 'facts' to support your procedural
claim, right?


James Love wrote:
> 
> I intend to vote in favor of both motions.   Jamie
> 
> --------------------------------
> James Love mailto:james.love@cptech.org
> http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

-- 
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin		phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec		fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html