Return to self-nomination Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	mueller
Date/Time:	Tue, June 6, 2000 at 5:42 PM GMT
Browser:	Netscape Communicator V4.04 using Windows 95
Score:	5
Subject:	tsk tsk
Message:
>2) The restriction on supporting only one >nomination (Rule 6) is patently ridiculous >and totally undemocratic. McLaughlin: Why?  Given that only one candidate will be elected per region, why should each member in that region not be limited to supporting the one candidate she likes best?  I don't see anything undemocratic about that. ----- Response to McLaughlin: This is an unbearably weak argument. The point is that in the nomination process people know very little about the candidates. They haven't started to campaign yet. People also do not know who will succeed in obtaining the nomination. Thus, they could easily "throw away" their nominating vote on someone who gets 9% of the support (which is nevertheless evidence of substantial support) and then be unable to support anyone else. This is a highly and, I suspect, deliberately undemocratic requirement.

Message Thread:

• Egregious flaws in Proposed Rules for Self-Nomination — dblake, May 31 @ 6:42 AM (3/7)
• Some questions — Andrew McLaughlin, June 5 @ 3:49 AM (4/4)
• self-nomination — winnetou, June 30 @ 8:43 PM (0/0)
• I disagree with Andrew McLaughlin's response to point (2) — smithco, June 28 @ 12:18 AM (0/0)
• Nomination process and campaigning — dltallan, June 20 @ 1:35 PM (0/0)
• tsk tsk — mueller, June 6 @ 5:42 PM (0/0)
• I agree! — Ling, June 2 @ 7:05 PM (0/0)
• Thank you — reedpc, May 31 @ 8:53 PM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy