🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep8.182545.11140@stephsf.com> wengland@stephsf.com (Bill England) writes:
>   WHAT!?!  No vote even ?????
>
[some deleted]

  Think of it as a trial balloon.  We don't have to adhere to the 
network-at-large standards for local groups or groups that we don't
care about the distribution of.  

  In other words, if some guy in greenland gets upset with the lack of
votes for seattle.*, that guy in greenland is free to not carry the
offending groups.  The same is true of the network groups at large, but
there are enough people who subscribe to the voting concept that raise
a fuss about it when someone creates a group on a national heirarchy, 
but I don't think we'll have that problem here.  

  How valid is a vote in which less than 1/1000th of 1% of the possible
voters vote?  

  Bruce