I would rather that as well, Erik. I just thought it trivialized what
is a significant issue. ('it' being a graphic depicting...well, I'm not
sure what it was depicting.)
This should be a discursive process, imo.
Erik Moeller wrote:
Don't be so easily discouraged; I thought it was
interesting. Hard to
quantify positions like that, of course. I'd prefer a table with
quotes from the Q&A page.
On 6/26/07, Jeandré du Toit <jackdt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/26/07, Brad Patrick
<bradp.wmf(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So now the election process itself has become a
parody of USA Today?
This is absurdity. If you have sufficient concerns about specific
candidates say so. I would hope people who care enough about the issue
to be interested in learning people's positions could do so without
visual aids.
Sorry. I've tagged it for speedy deletion G6.
I asked here because my position on summaries being good was also
rejected at another site: I was burned by those admins for linking to
the opensecrets page for a famous person and the voting history for
the person they contributed to.
--
User:Jeandré du Toit
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l