Sgeo wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Sean Hunt<ride...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> For each Agoran Decision currently in its voting period, if FOR is a
>> valid option for that decision, I cast a number of ballots FOR on that
>> decision equal to my voting limit on that decision.
>>
>
> If you're that lazy, why not just vote PRESENT on everything, or just
> not vote? I don't think people should vote FOR things they haven't
> read.
I've given them all a cursory glance and I don't have a serious
objection to any of them passing. So FOR is the way I'm going.
