<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
As far as I recall, nobody has suggested the 100+ individuals have or<br>
had sinister reasons. If somebody is claiming that, let's discuss it<br>
separately.<br>
If nobody is claiming that, putting it forward is derailing the discussion.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Hi Rihards,</div><div>Perhaps you missed it, since this thread has gotten quite lengthy, but in my first message I replied directly to Nuno, who wrote:</div><div><br></div><div>"One question, <b>not a single</b> one of these, recently called
<b>100 "humans" expressed concern, doubts or showed any sign of
not being able to vote</b>? 100, not 10, 100 that did not
express themselves about not being able to vote. Lets me think
that people in India are very shy indeed. Lucky we got 900 members
and those "100 humans" were just 1/10 of the members." </div><div> </div><div>Perhaps he was being sarcastic, as Guillaume suggested, or there is a language barrier issue here, but I read it very much as casting aspersions on the motivations of the individual employees, and that's why I replied. <br></div><div><br></div><div>-Kathleen<br></div></div></div>