response 275 of 367:

Mar 11 02:15 UTC 1997

I don't think Richard should be telling people how they should vote.

response 277 of 367:

Mar 11 13:25 UTC 1997

I don't think David should be telling people how they should vote.
  
*giggle*

response 279 of 367:

Mar 11 21:56 UTC 1997

The only difference is that one wants her to change and one doesn't. 
In my opinion, dpc's comments are disingenuous because of his bias.
I think Babozita was pointing that out in his giggly way.

Valerie is perfectly capable of making up her own mind how to vote, but 
I was certainly curious to know why she changed her mind. Now that I 
know i am a bit disappointed. I am inclined to believe that a compromise 
will fail, because Valerie's own compromise failed. I would (like 
Valerie) prefer a compromise to Mary's proposal. I am voting for Mary's 
exactly for the reasons Richard laid out. If it fails we will probably 
have no unregistered reading at all. 

This is ironic, that two camps that favor unregistered reading can't 
agree on a proposal that they can both vote for. I oppose this irony by 
voting for a second-best solution. I will work hard to see a compromise 
solution replace the one we are voting for today, whether this one pases 
or not.

response 281 of 367:

Mar 12 02:47 UTC 1997

**richard thinks valerie is letting her emotional response to the
ramifications of this issue cloud her judgement, and she should change her
vote back**

response 283 of 367:

Mar 12 15:27 UTC 1997

The president has asked me to cool it on the mudslinging. I had left co-op
anyhow, but I came back to apologize. I've had strep throat since Friday,
combined with a stomach flu and a 102-degree fever. While that isn't an
excuse, some of the inflammatory posts were made during said fever. Valerie
(my wife, not the president) and Jenna can both attest that I haven't quite
been myself emotionally. I apologize for any discomfort that I may have
caused.
  
I never said anything I didn't mean, but I chose langauge and styles that were
inappropriate to this forum, at this time.

response 285 of 367:

Mar 12 23:05 UTC 1997

I grew up in a family that tended to disagree with enthusiasm.
No problem here.  I hope you feel better soon, Paul.

response 287 of 367:

Mar 13 05:20 UTC 1997

Results are as follows: 40 voting members in good standing cast
ballots.
                Yes     21
                No      19

In addition, 72 non-members voted. The results here (which don't
count towards determining the outcome) are

                Yes     40
                No      32

response 289 of 367:

Mar 13 12:23 UTC 1997

I hope you, cmcgee, and you valerie are happy! Hads you two not switched your
votes, this thing would be DEAD.

response 291 of 367:

Mar 13 15:52 UTC 1997

*smiles at Ryan* I was advised by one staffer that I was being discussed in
the Staff conference about a year ago. That statement was confirmed, in very
roundabout ways, by two other staffers and outrightly denied by yet two other
staffers. So I heartily agree with you, and have said so before. I'm told 90%
of the staff conference is so boring that it would be torture for anyone else
to HAVE to read it, though. =}

response 295 of 367:

Mar 13 17:15 UTC 1997

"Flip the switch", what an appropriate phrase for it.  >8)

response 297 of 367:

Mar 13 18:35 UTC 1997

I would hope, that before "flipping the switch", that the designers of
Backtalk wait for the outcome of the currently-in-process compromise.  I see
no benefit in offending people unnecessarily by hasty implementation of
something that might last only 15-20 days.

response 299 of 367:

Mar 13 21:53 UTC 1997

I must point out that the vote switches occurred during the improperly-
extended period of voting, confirmed by the switchers.  If the vote
had ended when it should have, the motion would have been defeated.
        Unbelievable!