John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > He said the results have not been tabulated. You say "he has the
> > results of the vote". Well, are you calling him a liar?
>
> I refuse to fall for the bait of a troll.
You know, I'm one of your supporters. I like your resolution. I
think you'
On 14 Nov 2000, John Goerzen wrote:
> Well, your e-mail was so illogical and senseless that I almost wonder
> if it's worth my time reading it, but I'll reply anyway.
Getting close to the last refuge of the incompetent?
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > On what basis do you claim
I figured you'd go with the $%&# flamer angle myself :) But hey, if it
trips your trigger...The Rand thing Is getting old, however...All in all,
I'd rate it a 7.5: needs work before it's Olympic caliber.
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2000 at 12:33:39PM -0700, Jo
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I figured you'd go with the $%&# flamer angle myself :) But hey, if it
> trips your trigger...The Rand thing Is getting old, however...All in all,
> I'd rate it a 7.5: needs work before it's Olympic caliber.
Oh, I think Rand doesn't deserve a C. Perhaps m
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 12:23:36AM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> The Rand thing Is getting old, however...
I entirely agree. How about using your real name?
--
G. Branden Robinson |Software engineering: that part of
Debian GNU/Linux|computer science which is too
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, the Constitutional Convention was supposed to amend the
> Articles, and they did: they replaced them lock stock and barrel. They
> did nothing to other documents: the Barbary papers were not repudiated: in
> fact, in 1795, the succeeding Emperor o
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 11:52:13AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
[...]
Thanks for an informative post instead of one that just screams at me.
Definitely food for thought.
And yes, "strategic" voting is exactly why I objected so strongly to your
"gutting" amendment. I am frankly amazed that the sce
On Mon, Nov 13, 2000 at 12:33:39PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> The DPS is not completely blameless in this issue, but "let ye who is
> without sin cast the first stone"
An interesting allusion from a Randroid.
--
G. Branden Robinson |
Debian GNU/Linux| Mob rule isn't
On Thu, Nov 09, 2000 at 09:06:50PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Perhaps this is because Branden only pointed out the expiry
> > after the ballot was issued?
>
> I believe that is incorrect.
It isn't. I posted my expiry analysis the day after Darr
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 12:00:05AM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Could someone explain to me, in simple terms, how Condorcet-based
> voting schemes work in the face of a supermajority requirement?
Hmmm.
The current way it's meant to work is that the supermajority only comes
into play on the final
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Uh, non-free is not going on Progeny CDs. non-free is not now, and
> > never was, on Debian CDs. I have no desire to see non-free on either
> > CDs. I want neither to distribute non-free. All the software being
> > written at Progeny is GPL'd.
>
> ftp
On 14 Nov 2000, John Goerzen wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > Uh, non-free is not going on Progeny CDs. non-free is not now, and
> > > never was, on Debian CDs. I have no desire to see non-free on either
> > > CDs. I want neither to distribute non-free. All the software
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 12:00:05AM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Could someone explain to me, in simple terms, how Condorcet-based
> voting schemes work in the face of a supermajority requirement?
Hmmm.
The current way it's meant to work is that the supermajority only comes
into play on the final
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Uh, non-free is not going on Progeny CDs. non-free is not now, and
> > never was, on Debian CDs. I have no desire to see non-free on either
> > CDs. I want neither to distribute non-free. All the software being
> > written at Progeny is GPL'd.
>
> ft
On 14 Nov 2000, John Goerzen wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > Uh, non-free is not going on Progeny CDs. non-free is not now, and
> > > never was, on Debian CDs. I have no desire to see non-free on either
> > > CDs. I want neither to distribute non-free. All the software
15 matches
Mail list logo
