Raul Miller wrote: > >>Here's the problem: a vote against an option can cause quorum to be met > >>and therefore cause the option to win. This discourages sincere votes > >>against the option.
John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > >i don't buy that logic. the case is true, and having X>Q votes causes > >the vote to be binding. On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 03:50:10PM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote: > I agree with John. Can you explain what he's saying in a meaningful fashion? [It looks to me like he's contradicting himself, but apparently you have a self-consistent way of interpreting what he's saying?] -- Raul
