Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

2009-01-03 Thread Don Armstrong
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009, Chris Waters wrote: > Part of the problem is that we never have "no, just no" on our > ballots, so the only alternative is to vote "further discussion", > even if you have no interest whatsoever in any further discussion, > and, as far as you're concerned, the matter is settled

Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

2009-01-03 Thread Don Armstrong
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009, Chris Waters wrote: > On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 09:17:28AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > > (Don has, after subsequent argument, modified this to “… that > > you don't plan on ranking above Further Discussion”.) > > Bad, bad idea! What if you are planning to rank "Further Discussio

Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

2009-01-03 Thread Chris Waters
On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 12:50:21PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > * Adeodato Simó [090101 23:36]: > > No. In my opinion, an option in the ballot is (should be) a very scarce > > resource. Like you would in a situation of limited water supply in a > > boat shared with friends, you should act res

Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

2009-01-03 Thread Chris Waters
On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 09:17:28AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > (Don has, after subsequent argument, modified this to “… that > you don't plan on ranking above Further Discussion”.) Bad, bad idea! What if you are planning to rank "Further Discussion" as 1, but staill have a compromise you'd be wil

Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

2009-01-03 Thread Chris Waters
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 09:47:39PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > I'm not sure that I find it usefully different, unless what you're > proposing is a compromise that you hope everyone will be able to agree > upon. I think that's a hugely important ability. I'm also worried that setting the thresho

... common grounds .... s/coersion/soft persuasion/g

2009-01-03 Thread Osamu Aoki
Hi, thanks I do not know why I misunderstood the correct meaning of coercion http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/coercion/ Now I know. On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 05:07:43PM +, MJ Ray wrote: > Osamu Aoki wrote: > > I am sick of seeing too many votes/policy-discussion/... to force other > >

Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

2009-01-03 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 06:41:56PM +1030, Ron wrote: >It seems quite clear that recent (ab)uses of the GR process have had >little positive and immense negative affects on the project. And I >don't mean that in the sense that "My Favourite Option Ma

quadratics graph and slopes

2009-01-03 Thread Rose, Cheryl
y=-x - Visit www.nyc.gov/hhc CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information in this E-Mail may be confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, d

Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

2009-01-03 Thread Ron
> On Fri, 02 Jan 2009, MJ Ray wrote: > > Don Armstrong wrote: > > If an option can't get seconds enough to pass K (or Q), it doesn't > > have support in the DD population or the proposers are lazy, and don't > > want to find enough support. In either case, people's time shouldn't > > be wasted wit