"economic" mojority

[Max Moritz Sievers]

On Wednesday 08 August 2001 18:37, you wrote:
> They have obviously tried to keep it impartial, and
> aren't 'unsatisfied by the results' - just trying in
> their own eyes to make it fair. If you disagree, fair
> enough - and like it says, the eventual weighting will be
> done by politcs.

No, weighting is undemocratic. They think the "Open 
Sourcers" are just extremists and spinners and so their 
votes shouldn't count. This is the purpose of the 
"Micro$oft"-Paragraph where they try to make the 
EuroLinux-Petition implausible.
I don't know WTF Microsoft has to do with this case
(see, I can write "Microsoft" with "s").

To show you the injustice I translate 
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/forum/go.shtml?tres=1&msg=145&g=20010806jk002 
"We recieved majorly declining statements (91% against) to 
the draft bill 'reintroduction of slavery`. But a large 
proportion of this group was prolatarians - mostly even 
with dark skin. On the other hand 54% of the big landowners 
voted for the reintroduction of slavery. We advise the 
commission to orientate themselfes on the economic power of 
the participants." Bernd Paysan (bernd.paysan at gmx.de)

> If it was the other way round, and 90% companies for
> patents, you'd be saying how you think the 10%-against
> should be weighted more etc..

I wouldn't. In a democratic system everyone has exactly 
_one_ vote. There is no "weigthing". In the EU just money 
reigns. The only thing that is missing in the analysis are 
the bank statements of the authors.


/MMS

-- 
Standing up to an evil system is exhilarating.    RMS