RE: [atlarge-discuss] Nominations close at midnight

["Abel Wisman" <abel@able-towers.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Joop Teernstra [mailto:terastra@terabytz.co.nz] 
Sent: 02 May 2003 12:59
To: J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin; atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Nominations close at midnight

<cut for size>

>The nominations in the Polling Booth close on may 4.  At least there
are 
>more people participating in nominations than just the two of us here.
I will add the resulting names on the list that I >have now posted in 
>www.icannatlarge.com/voting.htm
>It is better to give this process a little more time to make sure that
the 
>election result is accepted.


The rules for the process were set, what you set on your site and more
precisely in your commercial endeavour does not reflect upon this
organisation, nominations are closed.

There was a poor nomination "turn-out" which made it even more clear
that the primary question should be whether continuation of this
organisation would ever lead to something at all.

As participation at this moment in time is very low, we can only
conclude that those set to destroy have once again succeeded, those set
to succeed and be "bootstrap-members" have once again failed (see
previous endeavours in f.i. IDNO) and the infighting has chased away
more people then we can even begin to imagine, let alone any hopes of
being recognised as a serious representation of internet users world
wide.

Concentration on phenomena's as J Williams have caused more then enough
disruption and still do, your "fight" for recognition has done the same.

Looking over the list of nominations I can only conclude that there are
several imaginary people on there as well as several rejected and former
panel-members.

In all it was a success of showing how not to do such a thing.

I do sincerely hope that Danny's plan has more success, though it is
awfully silent around that, but at least it stands some chance.

Reality has it that participation in Joop's Forums is even far lower
then on this maillinglist and that it is obvious that unless a strong
panel takes charge to get some things done, nothing will ever come of
this organisation.
If that means ignoring the single shouter who does not agree and is
hence labelled undemocratic, then so be it, if the new panel to be
strives to please every one member then nothing can even be accomplished
for the simple reason of diversity in numbers.

I for one am very curious to see who of the nominees will accept their
nomination, but doubt it will be more then a hand full of the "known and
respected" entities.

It is a sad realisation that a good idea can turn bad if a few people
are dead set on disruption and their own hidden agendas.


>>4. the deadline for nominees to accept to be candidate is May 5th
00:00 
>>GMT.

>This is also too short.
>Please give it a few more days.

>Doing this in a hurry, without seconding, is counterproductive.

>I want new officers as much as you do, but not with a 12 month mandate
if 
>the nomination process is so flawed.

>-joop-



It will be called flawed in any way and under any circumstances, that is
part of the agenda of those set to disrupt or enhance their own
importance, the time to react is short, but should be sufficient, an
extension for non-reactors as a whole could be given seeing as it is a
(long) weekend over which this has to be done and some people might not
get the emails over that weekend, but if in the email is asked for a
response with yes or no to acceptance then most people will be able to
react within that time and a pretty clear list of candidates should be
available after the weekend.


Abel



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