[Wikipedia-l] Re: New request for Cantonese Wikipedia: vote at 29-6

[Michael Snow]

Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> Pawe³ Dembowski wrote:
>>
>>>> Consider 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?
>>
>> Ec
>
> Hoi,
> 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.

--Michael Snow