Ray Saintonge wrote:
Pawe³ Dembowski wrote:
the folks who were at the meeting part of the "no" votes.
They should have voted where they were supposed to vote then.
An interesting observation. Is there a policy anywhere saying where
people are "supposed" to vote?
When there is a vote, when this vote is considered in a meeting like
it has, they should either put up or shut up. When a small group of
people meets and decide on something, in essence this is just what
happened: a small group of people who decided something. Nothing
special in and of itself. Obviously they do not need to vote, but when
they do not vote, they should not moan when their voice is not
considered when the vote is evaluated.
Perhaps, but then those who did vote should not moan when the vote is
not considered definitive and binding by others. Taking your reasoning
to its logical conclusion, the only significance of a vote is that it
had a certain result. The vote does not dictate a course of action or
have any further consequences.