Spokesman for Earth Update #3
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Path: icaen!news.uiowa.edu!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!decwrl!csus.edu!netcom.com!rickg
From: rickg@netcom.com (Rick Gordon)
Subject: Re: Spokesman for Earth Update #3
Message-ID: <y#0n48.rickg@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 92 04:36:28 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Democracy in Action
References: <y88nd_=.rickg@netcom.com> <1992Sep24.141517.1@indyvax.iupui.edu> <k!0nw!j.jeffp@netcom.com>
Followup-To: alt.alien.visitors
Lines: 31
In article <k!0nw!j.jeffp@netcom.com> Jeff Papineau writes:
> I think I agree with Harvey, we should give people about a week to get
>thier votes in. It is just too easy to miss a two day window and then
>the vote means nothing if all those interested do not participate due
>to missing a two day window.
All those interested have read the several announcements of the
various dates and times. Surely 48 hours is sufficient time to
remember to vote on such an important issue.
>We have a week to do each of the other steps involved here, and a week
>seems reasoanble to insure that everyone has a chance to participate.
>My biggest fear is that I will send in my vote one hour early or late,\
>and it will be nullified, without informing me as such.
Again, a 48-hour window (and remember, it's the timestamp on your
vote, *not* the time it arrives, that's significant) will allow
all but the acutely chronologically challenged to participate.
Reminders will be posted during the voting period.
>Maybe we need to vote on how long we should take to vote?
No need. I have faith in the readership's ability to read both a
calendar and a clock.
>Jeff-
--
Rick Gordon | "Often in error, never in doubt."
rickg@netcom.com | --- Universal Marketing Department motto
Path: icaen!news.uiowa.edu!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!decwrl!csus.edu!netcom.com!rickg
From: rickg@netcom.com (Rick Gordon)
Subject: Re: Spokesman for Earth Update #3
Message-ID: <y#0n48.rickg@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 92 04:36:28 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Democracy in Action
References: <y88nd_=.rickg@netcom.com> <1992Sep24.141517.1@indyvax.iupui.edu> <k!0nw!j.jeffp@netcom.com>
Followup-To: alt.alien.visitors
Lines: 31
In article <k!0nw!j.jeffp@netcom.com> Jeff Papineau writes:
> I think I agree with Harvey, we should give people about a week to get
>thier votes in. It is just too easy to miss a two day window and then
>the vote means nothing if all those interested do not participate due
>to missing a two day window.
All those interested have read the several announcements of the
various dates and times. Surely 48 hours is sufficient time to
remember to vote on such an important issue.
>We have a week to do each of the other steps involved here, and a week
>seems reasoanble to insure that everyone has a chance to participate.
>My biggest fear is that I will send in my vote one hour early or late,\
>and it will be nullified, without informing me as such.
Again, a 48-hour window (and remember, it's the timestamp on your
vote, *not* the time it arrives, that's significant) will allow
all but the acutely chronologically challenged to participate.
Reminders will be posted during the voting period.
>Maybe we need to vote on how long we should take to vote?
No need. I have faith in the readership's ability to read both a
calendar and a clock.
>Jeff-
--
Rick Gordon | "Often in error, never in doubt."
rickg@netcom.com | --- Universal Marketing Department motto
Comments
Post a Comment