Si wrote:<Please be careful about how you put across comments with regard to the legitimacy of this voting procedure. Although it is fine to question the mechanics chosen for the vote, suggestions or inferences that the method was chosen because someone _will_ be checking up on how people vote will not be tolerated unless you can supply clear proof of your belief.>
Exhibit One for the prosecution; ERS are not involved in the process => the process is more open to misuse and abuse than it previously was.
Can the chosen method of voting GUARANTEE no one within the CTC will EVER know how I, or anyone else, voted on this issue? No, thought not. Using the ERS would have guaranteed that.
Very little in life happens by chance. More often things happen by design.
So in this case "Cui Bono?"
Not sure why you are bothering to argue with me - I am making no comment on the voting system one way or another. But I shall spell out, yet again, what I am saying: for the sake of the forum and the forum's admin, we will not tolerate any unsubstantiated accusation of anyone partaking in cheating/underhand dealing/conning/etc (note the term 'unsubstantiated', and the fact that we will always stay on the safe side of any grey areas). Because if you make such a claim without proof then you are potentially committing slander, and you run the risk of dragging the forum admin into court with you if the target of your accusation decides to take action. If, on the other hand, you have got real proof of your opinion and you display this proof, then your opinion changes from being 0pinion to being fact, and there is not a problem.
Stating that the voting system is not as secure as it was with ERS is not an accusation that someone is trying to pervert the vote, and thus is a perfectly allowable statement to make. Stating that the voting system could allow someone to work out who voted which way is not an accusation that someone will do that, and thus is a perfectly reasonable statement to make. Saying that people might worry about their employers knowing which way that they vote is also perfectly acceptable because it is not the same as saying that the employer will be monitoring the vote and punishing those that vote the wrong way.
However, saying that someone is definitely going to be using this voting system to intentionally and unfairly pervert the outcome, based upon the evidence so far presented, is not acceptable. Perhaps it would be easier for people to imagine that instead of just posting on some manky old internet forum, they were stood in court having to defend what they were saying - would they still feel so happy about what or how they had said it?
I don't think that I can make this any clearer, can I?
edit: please note, as I said, these issues are not going to be allowed to be sidetracked into discussions about moderation policy - I have made the rules clear and any such posts questioning moderation will be removed. By all means, however, feel free to discuss moderation policy with us via PM.