| 1 |
On Mon, 1 Jul 2013 23:14:05 +0200 |
| 2 |
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <arfrever.fta@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> 2013-07-01 22:35 Ciaran McCreesh napisał(a): |
| 4 |
> > So the whole thread is merely an attempt at bypassing the usual |
| 5 |
> > PMS / EAPI process |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> The purpose of this thread is to help each voter in voting by |
| 8 |
> allowing to observe which candidates have point of view similar to |
| 9 |
> point of view of this voter. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
That's a pretty dangerous purpose, since most of the issues you asked |
| 12 |
about aren't simple enough for a "point of view" to tell you anything. |
| 13 |
One of the interesting things about this problem domain is that often |
| 14 |
there are right answers and wrong answers, and people's opinions don't |
| 15 |
change whether or not something is impossible. I would be vary wary of |
| 16 |
decisions made based upon "that sounds like a good idea from a one line |
| 17 |
summary that didn't include references to the actual proposal and any |
| 18 |
associated discussion"... |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Or perhaps you were hoping candidates would reply "I'll defer becoming |
| 21 |
involved in these issues until we receive the detailed proposals that |
| 22 |
are usually provided to the Council when it comes to discussing EAPI |
| 23 |
issues"? If so, it was a bit disingenuous to provide such a long list |
| 24 |
of questions. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives