RE: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] questions appearing to have n ear consensus
At 08:23 PM 12/29/00, Phil King wrote:
>I certainly hope not, too easy for multiple answerers. But good for getting
>idea of how rough leanings of opinions are.
Exactly :) I'd be the last person to claim this is a secure method for a
formal vote, since a fairly web-literate person could vote more than once.
They'd have to work at it a bit, and it's probably not worth it to anyone
while it's only used for gathering process-related material. A vote with
something actually riding on the answers would be another matter.