On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 20 August 2011 14:31, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonav...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I would like to make tiny procedural point before things go any >> further, if I may, please don't let this stop the philosphical >> distractions going in any way (though perhaps better suited in their >> own thread). >> >> Since there is going to be such a short interval between the vote >> concluding, and the results being announced, is it the presumption >> that no due diligence needs to be adhered to with regards to vote >> fraud, and sock-puppets are explicitly allowed to vote? >> >> > > No. > > Each individual may vote once, using a single eligible account of his or her > choice. > > I do not understand why you would think that violating election rules would > be okay if there was the possibility one wouldn't get caught. Isn't that > like walking out of a store without paying for the television because the > clerk just happened to step away from the till for a few minutes? > > If it requires more time to do due diligence, then it will take more time. >
So why announce ridiculously unrealistic timeframe between the vote concluding and the results being announced? -- -- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]] _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
