* Andy Smith (andy@???) wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 09:33:22PM +0100, Stuart Sears wrote:
> > Adrian Bridgett wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 5, 2007 at 19:50:35 +0100 (+0100), Tony Whitmore wrote:
> > >> Chris Dennis wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Physical only, and then only if you've registered in advance (as you have).
> > >
> > > It's worth pointing out that one possibility for how we could support
> > > remote voting would be GPG signed votes. So taking part in any GPG
> > > signings which we do might be a good idea. Not relevant for this year
> > > though I'm afraid.
> >
> > Honestly, I really doubt that that will ever be adopted.
>
> I don't know whether you realise, but Adrian was talking about
> voting on LUG matters, such as who the officers are, as opposed to
> electing the government of the country. :)
>
> For the LUG, I hope it never is adopted since I don't believe that
> virtual participants should be able to vote on LUG matters.[1]
I hope that you are in the minority. This LUG started as a mailing
list, and therefore anybody who participates in that mailing list is
a valued member of the LUG. I see the meetings as a bit of a bonus
feature.
That said, I also appreciate the difficulties in 'virtual' voting,
and feel that the current arrangement is fair enough.
Just so we are clear, I have attended a few meetings, but not for
some time. I did have it in mind to get to this years AGM, but
another arrangement got in the way. There is always next year :-)
--
Philip Stubbs
http://www.stuphi.co.uk
