Discuss mailing list

[Amunak <amunak AT amunak.net>]

Do you realize that the more options there are the less likely this is going to pass? There should've been first a vote for the month length (allowing people to pick multiple options as well) and then using the most popular option in the actual proposal, which would be a regular yes/no vote.

The reason is simple - you could easily have the majority agree that there should be a time gap, but since the "no" votes are not split between the other options, they'll win. Unless you plan to divide the no (F) votes by the amount of "yes options" (or do something like I described above) this vote is not very democratic.

On 14.07.2018 2:05, Daniel Quintiliani wrote:

Beginning: July 14, 2018, 00:00 UTC
Ending: July 21, 2018, 00:00 UTC

Original discussion thread (note: the title does not reflect the proposal, as different ideas were proposed during discussion): https://lists.opennicproject.org/sympa/arc/discuss/2018-07/msg00024.html

-----

Previously failed proposals to create OpenNIC TLDs, and all identical duplicates of proposals which have failed to pass, shall not be introduced for another:

(A) 12 months
(B) 9 months
(C) 6 months
(D) 3 months
(E) 1 month
(F) I vote against this change in policy.

This proposal, if passed, shall take effect on September 1, 2018, at 00:00 UTC.

-----

My vote is for B (9 months).

--

-Dan Q

--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org