RE: [atlarge-discuss] Nominees list

[<bruce@barelyadequate.info>]

Joop Teernstra wrote:

| 881 members (a clean list of those who wish to receive
| announcements) ,
| including Jefsey, Bruce and Eric were informed of the pre-nomination
| process that I facilitated in the Polling Booth.

On whose authority did you stand up a nominating process alternative to the
official one?  And don't say "the membership": a poll of less than 10% of
our membership is not a valid mandate to implement anything!  You have a
responsibility to use your forum to support the official processes of this
organization.  Instead you chose to go into competition with them.

| As I promised, I spent a great deal of time to bring the
| nomination process
| outside of this mailing list and this was necessary in order
| that we do not
| end up with a few default candidates and no real election.

The official nominating process was not limited to this forum.  Every user
was sent a message.  To nominate people, they only had to hit their reply
button, add their nomination, and hit send.  An alternative nominating
method was not necessary.  All you succeded in doing was confusing the
membership.

| The only problem with this list is that it is preliminary and
| that the nominators are anonymous members.

No, the problem with this list was two-fold:

	1. It was not in compliance with the official nominating process e-mailed
to all members. It therefore confused the membership into thinking there was
more than one official method to nominate/second candidates.  There was not.
This effort of yours was the equavalent of the Portland Oregonian newspaper
running an alternative polling system in paralell with the official State of
Oregon election system, then demanding that their inputs, which the state
has no way to validate, should be included by the State in the official
talley.  I know what the State would say!  Fortunately for our members, we
were unwilling to make *them* pay for *your* actions.

	2. Given that you stood up an unauthorized, confusing alternate process to
gather nominations and seconds, you had an obligation to clearly indicate
that this was so, and to forward any inputs you gathered to myself and
Jefsey.  You did neither.  Instead you told us to "look here" for them and
do the work ourselves.  Even though we had no requirement to participate in
your wholly unauthorized process, we did not want the membership to suffer,
so we did our best to ensure that inputs made on your system were included
in our numbers.  But we had no mandate to do so.  And are not responsible if
inputs made on your system somehow missed getting into the official list.
If accuracy were important to you, *you* should have been the one to ensure
accuracy, given the alternative system was your responsibility.

| Therefore , I am willing to act as Nominator of all members
| who got 2 or
| more ticks and were not yet officially nominated otherwise.

Under our original nominating procedures, any member nominated by two or
more persons was automatically considered seconded.  This action of yours
was unnecessary and actually counterproductive: it gave the impression that
you were "mass seconding" these persons, which tweaked the sensibilities of
every amature conspiracy theorist on the list, and threw the nominations of
otherwise-acceptable candidates into controversy.

Joop, I know your heart was in the right place, but your actions were
inappropriate, added unneeded confusion and controversy to an already
controversial and contentious election process, and caused a lot of added
work and grief for myself and Jefsey.  If, in the future, you wish your
Polling Booth to be considered an official voting alternative for this
organization, then politick for same post-election.  But until the
membership validates that idea in an election, I would ask that you respect
the election procedures the next Panel puts in place, and refrain from
running a competing election process of your own.


Bruce Young
Portland, Oregon
bruce@barelyadequate.info
http://www.barelyadequate.info
--------------------------------------------
Support democratic control of the Internet!
Go to http://www.icannatlarge.org and Join ICANN At Large!




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