Re: [atlarge-discuss] méthodes de travail normal es,

["A/S Mauro D. Ríos" <mdrios@adinet.com.uy>]

Dear Joop,

Without the guarantees that I described very widely they don't exist,
then yes would agree with you of worrying, but we should make sure
that those guarantees exist.

It is not in these elections that I am thinking, but in all those that
will come. And mainly I think of the case that is only a member more
than looks at the panel from the tribune. For that reason I made my
long explanations of the guarantees that I, as a member, want to
settle down in @Large.

If the veto exists. The possibility that we give a kick to the
panelist that doesn't behave well exists. If the possibility exists of
summoning to premature elections. If a statute approved by all will
exist us. I don't see why you worry so much. The power is in hands of
all us (all the members).

Orchestra's director (Panel) is ridiculous if the orchestra (Members)
plays another music.

There is not possibility that the Panel acts in solitary how somebody
mentioned. I ignore that made the previous Panel or what didn't make,
but a Panel without back of the members, loses authority and doesn't
have the one who to direct or to administer.

We can discuss the Democracy but deeply. But I simply wanted to
outline the point of view from the practical look. If the process of
elections consumes 4 weeks full-time (1 month), it is also necessary
to add him the extensive times of writing and correction and voting of
the documents that are needed,.... the 3 months they end.  I believe
that of 6 to 12 months is more reasonable.

Another way........Why didn't we create a "writing commission and
code" and do we invite specialists in the matter so that they take us
out of the mud in those points and after having the written statutes,
the approved election procedures and the membership conditions we do
make the elections of the Panel?

I believe that we want you a lot more than the Panel.

I believe that it is not very practical to try to maintain cohesion
and coherence in a circular process of elections each "2 months". I
believe that it is underestimating the dimensions that @Large will
reach and we will bury in administrative and bureaucratic processes.
If we fear to the Panels, we can apply direct democracy, but even so
the fears of being manipulated by majorities marionettes would not
disappear (examples are many).

I don't want to reiterate my previous message (please read again),
there my conditions of guarantees are. If that is not completed...
then yes we have a serious problem and I will agree with you Joop.

I trust that the statutes and the other regulation processes and
administration, they will put the correct mark inside which the
members and the Panel will be able to move.

I assure you that I will fight with the teeth, if it is necessary, so
that those guarantees are in the table and they are completed. I am an
indefatigable fighter for the rights and the legitimate
representativeness (for that reason I believe in the obligatory vote).
If there are not game rules, written and clear, you cannot begin to
win and in fact all lose.

a hug
Mauro. -



----- Mensaje original ----- 
De: Joop Teernstra
Para: A/S Mauro D. Ríos ; At Large Discuss
Enviado: miércoles, 28 de mayo de 2003 20:05
Asunto: RE: [atlarge-discuss] méthodes de travail normal es,


At 08:32 a.m. 29/05/2003, A/S Mauro D. Ríos wrote:

>2) this election was summoned to choose a Panel for 1 year. I don't
know how
>you reached this conclusion. But I share that it is a wise time and
it will
>allow to the Panel to make many things (if one works well).

Mauro,

It worries me especially when unknown candidates insist on a one year
mandate. Especially when, through naivity or design, that mandate is
left
undefined and wide-open.

  This is nothing personal, but why would you be afraid that you might
not
get re-elected after 3 months to continue the many things that you
intend
to work on?

>3 months it is a very short time. If the Panel is limited at time so
short,
>the Panel will be submerged in an ocean of papers, it will be
submerged
>writing papers and documents and it will lose the action capacity to
extract
>from the clothier to @Large and to give to know the organization. In
>consequence the organization, perhaps, can lose its action capacity.
My fear
>is that for 3 months @Large passes to the shades, become an
organization
>that she only works toward inside.

On the contrary. It will be an atlarge where the voters get an early
chance
to scrutinize what the panel has been doing, to take responsibility
for
allowing its representatives to continue or to change course.

Do you not favour an organization where the members have the ultimate
authority?

(I will vote tomorrow)


-joop-


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