[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [atlarge-discuss] Judyth and Jan, voting method



Jefsey and all,

J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:

> Dear Jan,
> First, so you feel at ease:
> - I will NOT be a candidate
> - I will set-up the second polling solution we need  asap if needed,
> professionnally othewise.
>
> Now, there are three different aspects.
> 1. legitimacy
> 2. the list
> 3. the procedure
>
> legitimacy
> What Vittorio did was to try to kill for ever everything we clumsily built.
> Why, because if we start accepting once a breach in legitimacy we have no
> reason why to refuse next time.

  I agree with your observation here.

> So this election must be under the control
> of the Panel - or it is a new system and nothing will prevent anyone to do
> it again and to mare us again and again as it happened with IDNO.

  Or in the control of the Election committee with neutral watchdogs
and/or observers..  The Panel is about to be reconstituted if we
can put together a workable, secure, and trusted voting method/system.

>  This is
> why I will not be a candidate and will develop a voting solution: to ensure
> continuity.
>
> The list.
> I have an old list at some stage in my Panelist capacoty. I did not open
> it. Today only Vittorio, Bruce and me are legitimate in having that list,
> because people registered in an organization not in Joop's, Judyth's or
> Jan's hands. Since Vittorio, Bruce and me in different ways have asked you
> and Judyth to get the list and be watchdog and accepted it, you are
> legitimate watchdogs.

  I disagree that Judyth or Jan are legitimate Watchdogs.

> However Bruce and me should be copied the list for
> things to be clean and clear, since three on five authorized owners are not
> having it.

  This is an obvious problem, and a growing one as well.  We currently
do not have our own mailing list.

>
>
> The procedure
> I do not like the way Joop does not make work his system with a click and
> vote link. I do not like the fact that he wants only 2 trustees. I wish 5
> and with good programming skills. Both for my own tranquility as a voter
> and for their own sake (so no one says that one is pro-this one etc.)  So
> if there are 5 watchdog I am OK for Joop. My opinion is that no system
> qualifies if a candidate is involved.

  The best and only reasonable way to handle this obvious problem
is for Joop to turn over the Voting/Polling Booth to a third party
for this ONE election.  Than a election committee or commission
would be one way to further correct and permanently solve this
problem.

>
>
> I am no candidate. For reasons I gave yesterday. I want to be a watchdog.
> I certainly support Joop as a candidate and I will organize the vote should
> he be.
> I certainly support Joop's booth for a vote (it would save me a lot of time
> right now).
>
> jfc
>
> On 14:58 28/02/03, Jan Siren said:
>
> >J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Judyth and Jan,
> > > Do not misconstrue my remark on the voting method. Joop and everyone agree
> > > the vote should be carried by a third party (hopefully DNSO if one shot),
> > > or if no other simple way though the Booth with trustees if they feel at
> > > ease. No one, I think, may unfortunately take seriously Vittorio's solution
> > > because it was the first thing I suggested him to do when I nominated him
> > > for Chair against ... Joanna, and his only response ever since was "not the
> > > time".
> > >
> > > If we have no other solution, here is what I proposed Bruce and we feel we
> > > can manage (anyone welcome to code the CGI.
> > >
> >
> >....
> >
> >Jefsey, I cannot in good conscience endorse any particular procedure that I
> >haven't had an opportunity to "dry-run."  As is the case with this new
> >scheme.  My promise to do my best is no guarantee of success.  I have raised
> >this concern previously with Joop regarding his Polling Booth, and have (with
> >some hesitation) consented to give watchdogging a try, having participated in
> >one Polling Booth cycle as a voter.  (And having then perceived certain flaws
> >and subsequently reported them to him.)
> >
> >
> >
> >---
> >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> >Version: 6.0.454 / Virus Database: 253 - Release Date: 10/02/03
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801



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