On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 20:29:22 -0500
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In other words, would you regard it as irregular if the candidates
> continued to engage in discussion that makes "their identities and
> positions known", even after the close of the campaigning period?
Given Manoj's answer which basically says you guys can agree to whatever
rules of conduct you want, I'd like to ask that you *not* generate any
new material :) I think a three-week voting period is sensible as it
allows people to go over logs, mailing list archives, and everything
else before they make their decision(s).
How about you keep it to summaries of mailing list threads and IRC
conversations or similar? Ideally something self-centered, too, as a
summary of another candidate's position will likely result in the other
candidate feeling that they've been (deliberately?) misrepresented,
which would just result in a lot of extra discussion in a period when
people are supposed to be making decisions.
Thanks :)
--
Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in mud.
After a while, you realise the pig is enjoying it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
David B. Harris
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oftc.net/
4096R/59DDCB9F: CC53 F124 35C0 7BC2 58FE 7A3C 157D DFD9 59DD CB9F
(Retreive from subkeys.pgp.net or risk key corruption)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
