Re: Financial allocation poll stage 3

On Thursday, August 04, 2016 02:36:25 AM Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Ian Clarke writes:
> > I disagree, and you had more than enough opportunity to offer your
> > feedback
> > on this proposed approach months ago when I first proposed it.
> 
> I did provide feedback. You rejected it and accused me of attacking you.
> 
> I actually spent a lot of time trying to help improve the proposal, and
> I feel that all that effort was wasted.

I can understand both of your perspectives.
However there is a solution to your disagreement which doesn't require any of 
you to change your opinion:

We could realize that we haven't even completed this type of poll procedure 
yet and thus don't even know whether it will fail.
- Maybe it will produce results which the both of you are happy with! :)

So how about we just try the procedure as is, and postpone requests for a 
different one until it is finished and has actually failed obviously?

--
hopstolive  (keyword for Ians spam filter)

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
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=yBBa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----