[Foundation-l] Voting suffrage criteria (established members should be able to vote)

• Previous message: [Foundation-l] Voting suffrage criteria (established members should be able to vote)
• Next message: [Foundation-l] Voting suffrage criteria (established members should be able to vote)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 4:30 PM, Jon <scream at datascreamer.com> wrote:

> Oh my I used the wrong word.  I apologize, retribution was incorrect.
>
> Let me substitute that statement with
>
> "Smells like "I don't agree with your action, completely your fault, and
> you knew better, so even though I can verify your story... I don't think
> we can help you out.  No voting for you.
>
>
> This was not a case of retribution and I misspoke.
>
> Best,
> Jon
>

Not a problem.

What I'm saying isn't so much "completely your fault" as "there are serious
consequences with allowing individual changes to the voter list, and I don't
think it should be done unless there's a very, very dire case where the
Foundation itself screwed up".  There are many potential problems with
allowing users to combine accounts, or use suffrage from an account they
can't physically access.  While your identity could be easily verified,
others couldn't, and it would open up a huge can of worms to allow any such
combinations.

-- 
[[User:Ral315]]

• Previous message: [Foundation-l] Voting suffrage criteria (established members should be able to vote)
• Next message: [Foundation-l] Voting suffrage criteria (established members should be able to vote)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]