On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Xyne <[email protected]> wrote: > Don deJuan wrote: > >>> There were objections! You consider them not sufficient to leads to this >>> result. >>> Everything that needed to be said has been said. After the voters have >>> made up their minds. > > Objections were raised and then countered with arguments. If anyone felt that > the objections were still valid after that then they should have replied with > their reasons. That is the point of the discussion period: to discuss the > issues and reconsider them in the light of the evolving conversation. It gives > the candidate the chance to respond and adapt as well. If anyone felt that my > reply to Dave failed to address the issues then they should have stated why. > No > one did. You explain again your former opinion. It's not because you are the last one to answer that you convince everyone. It's not because I will not give arguments to refute what you say that you convince me or others readers.
> I think I have said all that I have to say on this issue. I remain > disappointed > by how this played out and I am not alone. 12 TU are disappointed. 14 not. This is a result of a tight vote. Please, don't says the whole system is crap because graysky was not elected. We can vote no, otherwise we no longer vote. -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A
