RE: [atlarge-discuss] Watchdog members

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

> From: J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin [mailto:jefsey@club-internet.fr]
> Joanna,
> you certainly have hard time understanding that in this election the
> watchdogs are not to watch the ballots but to watch me.

That says it all. Why didn't you just appoint a Panel? It would save all
this time and the result would be the same.

>And that all the
> members will watch the ballots.

In other words, the Watchdogs never get to see the ballots until after you
personally have edited them.

This is mandatory because it is not
> acceptable that a non elected watchdog knows the votes. IDs have
> nothing to
> do with it.

Huh? How can Watchdogs act independently to verify the ballots if they are
not allowed to see them until you have edited all identifying marks? Since
when was it a requirement for there to be an election to appoint Watchdogs?
Watchdogs are officers of the organization who are appointed by elected
officials of the organization, in this case the Polling Committee (actually
I don't remember electing you but that is beside the point). So the way to
view Watchdogs is in much the same way you would view your legal counsel or
your accountant. These "advisors" are also are not elected. You do not get
good legal advice if you remove the name and address at the top of a lawsuit
because your attorney was not elected to his job by members of the
organization who is being sued? In the same way, you will not get
independent verification of election results unless you allow polling
officers aka Watchdogs to see the ballots.

> BTW I find odd that someone who volunteers to perform something acoording
> to an invitation, starts first to object to the invitation terms
> and wants
> to run his/her own show.

Not odd at all. I have a thorough understanding and experience of the role
of Watchdog through my particpation in the DNSO over the last 3 or so years.
If you had intended the role to be a different on,  with greatly reduced
repsonisbility, then you should have made that clear from the outset and not
used the label Watchdog - Puppydog would be more appropriate perhaps.
Obviuously you consider the Watchdogs to be subservient to your rule, rather
than be independant and this is where we disagree. There is only one master
in this organization and it is not you or Eric, or Bruce, it is the *Public
Interest*. Even if Paul Twomey himself extended the invitation to me, I
would still serve the same master, and you are certainly not the CEO of
ICANN.

We happen to want to be in democracy. There are
> members and these members are just voting now.

Actually, we haven't a clue who is voting now - maybe a few non-members in
the mix.

There voice will count in
> their organization. May be it will be not yours and not mine. But it will
> be their organization, believe me, and I wish them the best.

Oh please. Your voice is the loudest of all right now. It's all going your
way.
>
> Again, let be frank; I do  love Bruce's "lead, follow or get off".
> jfc
>

Interesting. I only ever see you pushing the "lead" part. Why won't you ever
"follow" another's lead, or let anybody else control anything Jesfey? Why do
you lecture them incessantly in private about how things should be. Why
won't you allow the Watchdogs to do their job without your interference? Why
do you have to control everything or sabotage it? Why won't you ever try the
"get off" part?

Regards,
Joanna

>
> n 21:56 28/05/03, Joanna Lane said:
>
> >Along with a few others, I was invited to be a Watchdog by
> Jefsey, I assume
> >because I have prior Watchdog experience in ICANN Elections.
> About the same
> >time, Joey Borda expressed concern about ID verification for
> candidates on
> >the main discuss list. I have spoken with Joey on the phone and am
> >reasonably certain he is who he says he is, is a trustworthy and reliable
> >person, with experience as an election officer, hence I had no
> hesitation in
> >recommending him as a Watchdog. I believe Jefsey then invited
> him to join.
> >
> >I myself resigned as a Watchdog shortly thereafter because I
> could not agree
> >with Jefsey's explicit objections to any form of ID verification of the
> >Watchdogs themselves, most of whom I do not know and have not seen
> >participating, save Norbert Klein. And while Jefsey did not respond to
> >reasoned argument, he cited published election rules, while refusing to
> >provide a copy of the same.
> >
> >So far as Watchdog working methods are concerned, they bear no
> relation to
> >that performed in ICANN DNSO Elections, except in name. It seems the new
> >role has defined unilaterally by Jefsey unilaterally and so far as I'm
> >aware, none of the Polling Committee - Jefsey, Bruce or Eric - have any
> >prior experience as an ICANN Watchdog. No doubt they will
> correct me if I'm
> >wrong. I believe one of the mistakes being made in this election, is not
> >forwarding the ballots in their raw state to Watchdogs, instead stripping
> >them of any ID. This severely restricts the watchdog's ability to double
> >check the count, or checking ballots against the valid
> membership list, and
> >so on. I would say that the watchdogs seem to be largely a
> symbolic gesture
> >rather than fulfilling any meaningful role, hence I wanted no
> part of it and
> >resigned.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Joanna
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos [mailto:sotiris@hermesnetwork.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 2:03 PM
> > > To: abel@able-towers.com
> > > Cc: 'At Large Discuss'
> > > Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Watchdog members
> > >
> > >
> > > I forgot to point out the fact that:
> > >
> > > www.execlub.org/atlarge.htm
> > >
> > > IS NOT the official web site of this organization.
> > >
> > > --Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Abel Wisman wrote:
> > >
> > > >According to www.execlub.org/atlarge.htm :
> > > >
> > > >Joe Borda
> > > >Alexandru Jalba
> > > >Norbert Klein
> > > >Thomas Roessler
> > > >Merle Swain
> > > >
> > > >These have "watchdog" with their name so I am assuming they have
> > > >accepted or offered to act as such.
> > > >
> > > >Regards
> > > >
> > > >Abel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> > >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> >For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> >
> >
> >
> >---
> >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> >Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date: 19/05/03
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>


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