Message-Id: <m0pewCV-0000R2C@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Thu, 10 Mar 1994 20:39:52 EST
Reply-To:     jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: The Mad Proposals
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1667
Lines: 42

I'm sorry if this appears twice, but when I first sent it, I got
the customary bounce from Nick's system but not my copy.


And (and this time it is him, I double-checked) says:

> > You do have a vote, like every Lojbanist, and your vote is duly noted.
>
> I'm very pleased to have a vote, of course, but by what right do I
> have one? Presumably anyone is a Lojbanist who wants to be, and anyone

Your problem stems from a faulty egalitarian assumption. "Everybody has
a vote" in no way implies "everybody's vote has equal weight".

This is the tally on the proposal so far:

In number of votes: 4 in favour - 3 against.
In weight:          0.31 in favour - 300 against.

As you can see, you may vote safely without fearing that it will
count unduly. (The .01 contribution is my own vote, in case anyone
wants to know.)

The outcome of the vote is only to give a feeling to those who
will decide for what others think. You don't have to worry about
those without net access, I've been informed that they're conservatives
by default, so they are counted as well.

The above is of course tongue-in-cheek, but that's more or less how
it works, and how it should work. Your vote _is_ duly noted (as your
respondant says, I presume it was lojbab?) and will have an influence,
but it won't be the deciding vote. (All this is my interpretation, BTW,
not official policy or anything like that.)

The most likely outcome is that nothing will change, but one can
always hope.

Jorge

(There's an updated version of the proposal coming soon, because
there is a possible reason for one of the changes to be not
completely satisfactory. Watch this space for more details soon.)