On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 09:37:51PM +0200, Jochen Voss wrote: > Sorry, but I think your logic here is strange. Why do you think > that the amendment is superfluous? Do you claim that you version > and John's version are the same?
http://www.bartleby.com/61/71/S0897100.html Superfluous does not mean equivalent. As for why, Manoj already expressed his reasoning in the text you quoted in your message: > > ... this amendment is superfluous, since if less than R > > votes are cast, then no option gets R votes, so all options are > > discarded, and the vote is invalidated anyway. Personally, I wouldn't argue what Manoj has argued (instead, I argue that John's proposal is harmful to the voting process), but you did ask. -- Raul
