[atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] New panel elections?

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

I agree with Vittorio that the Panel should conduct a panel vote, in
response to the strong indications from last week's poll, along the terms I
have already PROPOSED and which I believe Bruce is willing to second. This
MOTION was as follows-

MOTION: "that an election is called for a new Panel. I propose an eleven
member panel, as before. I propose that we allow ten days for nominations.
Ten days for statements and questions. And ten days for voting and
corroboration."

Ignoring the wishes of the membership, wishes already strongly indicated in
last week's Poll, is not an acceptable option.

If we fail to respond to what 171 of our most active members expressed, then
this Panel is IN DEFIANCE of its own membership.

This Panel would be effectively HI-JACKING the organisation for
who-knows-what-ends and saying "top-down" that they know better than the
democratic majority of our members.

If people challenge the pretty clear call for new elections, expressed last
week, then fine - go ahead and ask the members again - but in the end, this
rump of a left over Panel (including myself) has got to accept that it is
elected to represent the members' wishes, not its own.

I find this DEFIANCE of majority membership wishes completely unacceptable.

Why should 3 or 4 people BLOCK the expressed wishes of the membership to
hold new elections?

Let's get another thing straight. A "new panel list" has been posted which I
believe to be incorrect. It has assumed that Hans and Satya have resigned
from the panel. I was not aware they had, and I'd appreciate URLS showing
that they have.

Furthermore, people keep talking about the next round of elections being in
April. My understanding was that the next elections were due late July/early
August, by which time the present Panel will have served one year.

Setting aside these points of information, please can you call a Panel Vote
on my Motion, Vittorio.

Alternatively, Poll the whole membership on whether new elections should be
carried out.

I repeat, if this Panel refuses to take account of majority views of the
membership it claims to represent, then this Panel is surely IN DEFIANCE of
its own membership.

How do you justify ignoring what the members want?

Richard Henderson
----- Original Message -----
From: Vittorio Bertola <vb@bertola.eu.org>
To: Richard Henderson <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>
Cc: <bruce@barelyadequate.info>; At Large Panel
<atlarge-panel@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: [atlarge-panel] New panel elections?


On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 06:08:48 -0000, you wrote:

>Thank you, Bruce.
>
>My PROPOSAL, 8th February said:
>I PROPOSE: an election is called for a new Panel. I propose an eleven
member
>panel, as before. I propose that we allow ten days for nominations. Ten
days
>for statements and questions. And ten days for voting and corroboration.
>
>Bruce says he is "willing to support a motion that we commence now with
>elections."
>
>Vittorio, as we appear to have a Proposal and another Panel member willing
>to SECOND it, please could you call the whole Panel to vote on this
>(including the replacement Panelists for those who have recently resigned)?

Do we really want the replacements? It seems ridiculous to me to call
some new people in just to approve their own dismission. It would
disenfranchise them completely. I would rather go for a vote among the
remaining panelists (by the way, the voting rules we approved say that
quorum is 60% of the presently valid panel members, not a fixed
number).

If we call the replacements in, then I think it would be honest to at
least give them a chance to prove that they are better than their
predecessors - maybe they could reactivate the panel.
--
vb.                  [Vittorio Bertola - vb [at] bertola.eu.org]<---
-------------------> http://bertola.eu.org/ <-----------------------


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