We need voting. Some people here are advocating for a "republic". Who are they
to declare that they are an expert on experts? We must have voting. There are issues to be
resolved. Obviously we do not want to be dominated by a "majority" of generated
IPs. But we must have voting.
We must end the nonsense. Never again must a page like, "Anti-American
Wikipedians" be deleted on the say-so of some elitist. We must vote on such issues.
Never again should the name of Munchen or Colombo be decided by some American with
administrative powers. We must vote on such issues and we must start this voting process
soon.
Democracy is a difficult concept. Should we accept it we are then facecd with the decision
of whether to have a representative or pure democracy. I argue, in the spirit of the
founding fathers of America (who argued for a blend between a republic and a pure
democracy ie the representative democracy), I argue for a blend between the pure democracy
and the representative democracy.
We must have a vote. This first vote is very simple. It will ask
Should we start voting?
One can either say Yes, No, or give a user name. If you give a user name then your vote
will be identical to that users vote. In that manner, somebody that is unsure of what to
vote for, can give way to another whom they believe will make the correct choice.
Once we have a decision to start voting we can then work out the details of such a proces,
THROUGH VOTING.
There is one minor detail that must be decided and that is, "Who can vote in this
first question?" Shall we limit it to mav and larry sanger? Perhaps we will let Epopt
and Cunctuator contribute their opinion as well. On the other hand we could let everyone
vote and Fucking Asshole, Lear, and 63.32 will weigh in heavily with their opinions.
This decision must be made. We must vote and we must choose who can vote.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD