spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: RESULTS of the VOTE FOR THE SPF COUNCIL - plus, recording officers statement

2004-11-30 13:14:35
If she did not vote for herself, then she must have believed someone else
was better qualified.  She may be correct!  I guess the better person won!


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of 
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 12:51 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] RESULTS of the VOTE FOR THE SPF COUNCIL - plus,
recording officers statement



[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of 
william(at)elan.net

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, jpinkerton wrote:

VOTE FOR THE SPF COUNCIL

RESULT

Also FYI - the following people voted for themselve:
 Meng Weng Wong
 Chuck Mead
 Julian Mehnle
 Shevek
And 3 of them are in top 5 (and I voted for 2 of them too). 
My personal 
opinion is negative about voting like that and I consider it to be 
indication of arrogance, 

I once counted an election that was one vote short of being a dead heat. It
was for the Librarian of the Oxford Union Society. The candidate who lost
would have won if she had voted for herself (her opponent did). Under OUS
rules an election tie is settled on the basis of seniority and as the OUS
Secretary she was more senior.

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Read the whitepaper!  http://spf.pobox.com/whitepaper.pdf
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription, 
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>