Re: [atlarge-discuss] 11 Member Panel

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

Jan Siren wrote:

>Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>  
>
>>With respect to the 11 member panel.  In the event that one or more of
>>the elected Panelists proves to be unverifiable, I think it's best the
>>Panel be reduced in size rather than have any replacements promoted from
>>the candidates who did not make the top 11.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>I respectfully disagree.  I think it is important to start out, at least, 
>with a fully-populated 11-member Panel, even if that means dipping into the 
>"followers" at the outset.  I think any judge would find the distinction 
>between unverifiable elected Panelists, and Panelists who nullified 
>themselves through inaction later, as trivial; the same procedure for 
>replacement should apply in either case.
>

I disagree. I think that if any of the Panel members are unverifiable or
drop out, that we hold a snap election for the position(s). I think that
would be the best and fairest way to proceed. The most democratic.

--Sotiris Sotiropoulos



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