"economic" mojority

Max Moritz Sievers max.moritz.sievers at gmx.de
Wed Aug 8 18:40:49 UTC 2001

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 
"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.


Standing up to an evil system is exhilarating.    RMS

More information about the Discussion mailing list