[SM-Discuss] voting process
dkowis at shlrm.org
Fri Feb 10 10:12:31 EST 2006
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Jeremy Blosser (emrys) wrote:
> On Feb 10, Andrew ruskie Levstik [ruskie at mages.ath.cx] wrote:
>>> As long as we keep the auditing process simple while maintaining
>>> anonymity I think that would be fine.
>> An amendment to the auditing proccess...
>> Once the tally is done and posted to the ML ppl respond to it with
>> Yes my vote is properly counted or no mine isn't.
> Requiring this seems much to me, do people really think we need to go that
I don't think so. I think if someone's vote is misrepresented, then
they'll make it known. I don't think we need everyone to confirm it.
ISO Team Lead - www.sourcemage.org
Source Mage GNU/Linux
Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to
find easier ways to do something.
- Robert Heinlein
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
- Arthur C. Clarke
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the SM-Discuss