|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20020314162822.00a63770@hesiod> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 16:35:44 -0500 From: Justin Nelson <jmnelson@MIT.EDU> To: MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU In-Reply-To: <20020314212358.8688.qmail@web13901.mail.yahoo.com> I thought I made it explicit that i wasn't making a value judgement on how good of officers they would be. I thought i made it rather clear that that was irrelevant in this debate on whether or not buying a vote should be allowed. I forgot to explicitly say this, so I'll go ahead now: if you think they're good candidates, vote for them. Just don't accept the money b/c then it's not clear as to why you voted for them. If they win by votes that weren't bought, then I think that's awesome. I also never said the UA was worthless only that by people selling their votes for ten dollars, they were sending the message that they thought it was worthless. I'm sorry. Next time I'll try to be more explicit. >I voted for Creighton/Brar because they weren't wasting a lot of >money, time, etc. on paper posters, candy, free food, or anything >else. I'm always a little annoyed by campaign posters, because it >seems like people should have something better to do or think about >than how to get enough attention to get elected to student offices. I >appreciate Rhett's direct approach. > >Also, the UA isn't worthless. It's definitely important to have >students who specialize in talking to the administration and figuring >out how to represent student ideas. Rhett is pretty different than >most UA people, and diversity makes an organization stronger. >karen Can you honestly say that you vote for people *because* they gave you candy or baked you something? has that ever been the deciding factor of whether or not you voted for someone? I hope not. Here one can say that a good portion of people voted for Rhett/Victor primarily b/c of the $10. That's the major difference here. Justin At 01:23 PM 3/14/2002 -0800, Sam Johnson wrote: >Damn thats a long letter. > >Here's three equalities. > >Hooking up people before the election = vote buying (this includes >handing out candy and baking people cookies - thats just 'acceptable' >vote buying). > >Hooking up people after the election if you win = patronage. > >the current UA = sore losers. > >-Sam --------------------------------------------------------------------- Documentation on the use of the mailing lists mit-talk, all-talk, mit-news, housing-talk, and the mit-talk Zephyr class is available at: http://web.mit.edu/institvte/talk/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |