Re: [atlarge-discuss] Provisional Membership Committee

["Ron Sherwood" <sherwood@islands.vi>]

Hello Michael:

I do agree with most of what you say, but I am still of the opinion that it
was totally unnecessary and unreasonable to publish Joey Borda's financial
relationship with his mother.  Yes it was transparent... No it was not
necessary to question that relationship in public.  If Joey wanted to do
that in public, he has the right to do so.  We, as the verification
committee, do not have that right.

If the membership does not accept our verification of an individual and
needs further details to support it, we can ask the person needing
verification what is acceptable.  We did not do that.

The work that we (we???) are doing is the work of a verification and privacy
committee.  We are obliged to verify an individual's existence and to
justify that verification, while preserving the individual's privacy to the
greatest extent possible.  We did not do that.

If we had worked as a committee, instead of only reading what Sotiris
published after Sotiris published it.  We could have done our job properly.
Sotiris prevented that from happening and you are attempting to justify his
behaviour.

The end does not always justify the means.

Ron

----- Original Message -----
From: "Micheal Sherrill" <micheal@beethoven.com>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Provisional Membership Committee


> Hello Ron:
>
> I did not receive any information prior to the report by Sotiris.  In any
case, the Verification Committee needs to make all transactions public.
Sotiris is only doing his job.
>
> Besides, you are missing the point.  Verification information has to be
made public or it is not transparent.  Now, I am NOT talking about the
private information that could be used for draining a personal bank account.
But, Joey did publish a rather large amount of personal information to this
site earlier.
>
> I also disagree with your last sentence.  Without a Verification Committee
nothing would get done.  And all verifications need to be public.
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Micheal Sherrill
>
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
> From: "Ron Sherwood" <sherwood@islands.vi>
> Date:  Tue, 3 Jun 2003 14:10:04 -0400
>
> Hello, Michael:
>
> The only correspondence that I have received from Sotiris is what I read
on
> the public list.  I do not think that private information should be listed
> publicly. As a committee member, I formally object to that action and ask
> that it not happen again.
>
> If you received this information prior to it being published, and agreed
to
> go public with it, then you are as accountable as Sotiris. I received
> nothing other than what was published to the list.
>
> It is the job of a verification committee to confirm (or not) the identity
> of an individual and to report their findings to the Panel and the
> membership. If the whole process is to take place in public... we don't
need
> a verification committee.
>
> Best regards, Ron
>
>
> *************************************************
>  Listen to the "World's Classical Radio Station"
>             http://www.beethoven.com
> Great Music, Free Email, Exciting Bulletin Board!
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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