On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 05:18:30PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 10:08:23PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > > > Well, e.g., Raul Miller complained about the lack of a rationale. So I > > > provided one. Feel free to only include the part after "it is resolved > > > that." > > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:54:39PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > I think you are permitting yourself to be distracted by people who > > appear to be opposed to the very idea of voting on this. > > That's bogus -- I'm not at all opposed to the idea of voting on this.
Then I must not be talking about you. There have been other contributions to this discussion that ridiculed the very concept of voting on this. > I'm opposed to doing something which doesn't make sense, but I don't > think that's equivalent. [Do you?] No, but if your opposition is intractable, perhaps a better use of your time would be to persuade the fence-sitters to come to your side of the dispute. > > The filibuster is not a parliamentary technique countenanced by our > > Constitution, and I confess I am not sure why advocates of the GR, and > > people who simply want to see the issue voted on are tolerating it. > > Hogwash. > > The discussion period hasn't even started. Why are you rebutting a position I do not hold, and did not even put forward? > There is no filibuster, except in your imagination. You're free to draw your own conclusions from the average length of the threads on this subject over the past four years. -- G. Branden Robinson | That's the saving grace of humor: Debian GNU/Linux | if you fail, no one is laughing at [EMAIL PROTECTED] | you. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- A. Whitney Brown
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
