On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 10:35:02AM +1100, Glenn McGrath wrote: > On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:03:41 -0600 > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > My original point was that people who do not actually > > exercise their franchise are unlikely to be one of the active set -- > > and need to be looked at to see if they are indeed inactive. Having > > inactive members is not itself unhealthy, except it does inflate > > quorum a trifle, which can be bad in supermajority votes. > > > > I would like to see NM'ers who have been in the queue for more than 6 months > be able to vote.
I disagree. Isn't it better to solve the problem of long wait times than to give people priviledges early? Priviledges that potentially they may not otherwise get (ie if they are rejected). Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
