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=20010... "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@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