[atlarge-discuss] The list - atlarge vote of trust/distrust: result

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 06:14 a.m. 12/02/2003, you wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2003 11:31:32 +1300, you wrote:
>
> >> >Who ran the vote? Was it audited by anyone?
> >>
> >>Answers are: Joop Teernstra, and no.
> >
> >And the constructive answer is to run an official, properly supervised or
> >audited Poll, confirming (or not) the results of the unofficial Poll.
>
> Absolutely. That was in fact one of my proposals.
>
> >Another sensible question would be: why on earth would someone who has for
> >5 years tried  to prove that some form of e-democracy is possible,
> >undermine his own work by tampering with his polling results?
>
> I'm not saying that. I think that the results are credible, but that
> nonetheless, having been obtained unofficially and without impartial
> watchdogs, they can't be binding for icannatlarge.org.

True, but neither can your personal preferences or those of a  Panel 
without quorum bind the icannatlarge.

It is an impasse, and a  Panel Chair is supposed to lead us out of  it.

May I suggest that you get an interim enlargement of  the Panel with the 
sole mandate to dissolve itself and arrange for immediate elections?
And this time the mandate of the new Panel must be tightly circumscribed, 
to prevent a repeat of the last fiasco.

With regards to the impartiality of the watchdogs-- paying professional 
fees to outside auditors or outside Pollers is probably the best solution 
in this politically charged atmosphere.
Icannatlarge will not be able to do that before it is incorporated.

The initiative for an informal, yet reliable Poll with volunteer 
member-watchdogs was only made to help break the inactivity.
Do you oppose that?




-joop-



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de