RE: [atlarge-discuss] Panel Mandate options

[espresso@e-scape.net]

At 14:50 +0000 2003/02/28, Abel Wisman wrote:
>This is explanatory of Joop, HE decides, while he offered a service and
>we didn't ask for a hijack!
>
>HE decides nothing here without the approval of the panel or the full
>membership INCLUDING the 220 he missed conveniently in his previous
>straw poll.

I think Joop, like others amongst us, gets impatient and then
confuses what's fastest with what's best for the organization.

I think the Polling Booth setup is terrific -- for polls.

I have serious reservations about leaving it to any one person
or small sub-group to decide who polls whom how, what the
process should be, how questions should be chosen and wording
approved, etc. when it comes to matters intended to be binding
on *this* group.

That's one of the big reasons I hesitated to write up my own
version of the election bylaws and hope people will seriously
discuss the membership provisions I posted earlier, especially
those which relate directly to the conduct of elections and
referenda -- that is, eligibility to vote, disclosure of lists,
etc.

I think as an organization-in-formation, we'd do better to
stick with an e-mail-based system for making sure all our
members are invited to vote and that our complete, official
membership list is used to do the inviting.

>I would appreciate you being a watch-dog Judith, but in the official
>vote.

Assuming you mean me and not Judith (with an "i") Oppenheimer,
I am willing to be a scrutineer for whatever method this group
chooses to use, assuming it's something my Mac and my brain
are up to. But it seems we may need a "straw poll" on this
list to decide what that method will be -- we now have several
different suggestions on the table:

- an e-mail poll with the same rules as last election
- Joop's Polling Booth
- Jefsey's separate mechanism at atlarge.ws
- Jeff's multiple suggestions about external Web sites
- Vittorio's application-in-progress

and some decision must be reached soon as to whether Joop's
polling process, which is already under way, should proceed
as an activity of this group and, if so, whether it will be
used for our official elections or just as guidance on the
issues so that we can run our official elections later on
when we're better-prepared.

I must confess that at this point I can no longer tell
- whether it's better to continue a while longer with our
  now-shrunken Panel or to get the elections going ASAP;
- whether it makes sense for us to adopt Joop's system
  for these elections but make sure the process is not
  rushed or invalidated by unilateralism, or to discuss
  further which of the other options might be better;
- to what extent Joop's and Vittorio's lists differ,
  any why;
- how many members are reading this list but hesitate to
  express their own opinions, versus how many quietly
  unsubscribed or have given up entirely or don't have
  the foggiest idea what's being discussed.

Only part of my confusion is due to 4 hours' sleep in two
nights. The rest will most likely continue until our
flurry of messages settles down to some firm decisions
one way or another.

Regards,

Judyth





##########################################################
Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
##########################################################
"A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
"Un mot suffit aux sages; pour les autres, il en faut plus."
##########################################################



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