Re: [wg-c] Votebot sample ballot.

["Paul Stahura" <stahura@enom.com>]

see below...

> I think the names should be listed to verify one
> name/one vote.  Those who believe they already know each other's
intentions
> from the interaction and reaction forgot those like me who have listened
and
> watched.  All the issues have been thoroughly discussed, not needing my
> intervention, so I just listened to what you all have had to say.  I may
be
> the silent minority or could I be part of the silent majority?  The vote
> tally will tell.  Thanks for listening.

My thoughts almost exactly.
Jim, are you a mind reader or something?
I agree the vote should not be anonymous.

Signed,
Anonymous
(just kidding)

Paul Stahura
eNom, Inc.

>
> Jim Glanz
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert F. Connelly <rconnell@psi-japan.com>
> To: wg-c@dnso.org <wg-c@dnso.org>
> Date: Friday, September 10, 1999 12:33 AM
> Subject: RE: [wg-c] Votebot sample ballot.
>
>
> >At 14:38 10-09-1999 +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> >>Dear Bob,
> >>I've had a long argument with Kent about that. For the WG, I could
> probably
> >>agree with you.
> >>We all know each others view pretty well anyway.
> >>Anyway, my Booth allows for registering your name when you vote.
> >>We can declare votes without names invalid.
> >
> >Dear Joop:
> >
> >I must admit, at first I thought it strange to have everyone know my
vote.
> >The first such vote was for the first officers of PAB.  I had several
> >friends I'd like to have supported for the Chair positions.
> >
> >But considering the suspicions of the group, it turned out to be the only
> >way for everyone to know that his/her vote was properly recorded and that
> >only eligible voters were casting votes.
> >
> >Thanks for understanding,
> >Regards, BobC
> >
> >
> >
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >"I've sawed this board off three times, and it's *still* too short".
> >
> >Carpenter foreman.
> >