[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [atlarge-discuss] Panel Motion to put Jonathan Robin on Panel is illegitimate?

Dear Richard,
1. I certainly conceede that you know regular English better than me.

In that case I pretend to know democracy and human people better
than those who voted the motion. 25% could be acceptable. 75% is
mere group tiranny and again illegitimacy.

Again the Panel can only acknowledge the defacto resignation of
a panelist and replace it. This is what the Members have voted on:
I quote: "Please [X] mark the candidates you support. The 11 most
supported ones will be elected. In case of a resignation the next in
line will be elected".

Sebastien stopped responding. Saying he has resigned is reasonable.
A vote of distrust of André by his opponents has no value, all the
more than he obviously shared in 74% of the votes. A distrust could
only be voted by the Members.


2. IRT Jonathan Robin, your position is wrong and contradictory.

You say "Before the election was over, he was out of it."

- he was not. You say now that he withdrew from election. To do
  that he should have been removed from the ballot. Only that would
  have made him removed from the vote.
- you say you want to respect the votes of the Members and then
  you refuse their decision by your own criteria of a long forgot move
  of temper which was never enacted and is contradicted by the
  further positions, acceptance and decisions of the Candiate and
  the votes of the Members.

Janathan resigned in the same fashion and Joanna said she
quitted this list for ever and yourself withraw yourself several times
or refused to commit. Let not confuse our fights. We are here to
fight for the users, not to waste our time fighting our own friends
and the people we elected. You may not have voted for Jonathan
but more members voted for him than for you and me: we owe
them respect.


3. I fully support your point that Members are to decide. The Members
have spoken and are not listened to. They have asked among others:

- to be listen : the Panel has not published its understanding of the
  Members demands and how it intend to respect them
- committees elected by the Members, liaised by Panelists and
  supported by WGs open to Members. Were are the elections?
- the Panel to be a support rather than a leader
- a monthly poll to confirm important decision and on current issues
  June Poll was not run. I do not see July poll ran. Will August be?

If August is not prepared before the end of July, I will consider that
the Panel has no intent to run monthly poll. I will then start running
a monthly survey, calling on all the Members of the Governance I
know, independently from any organization.





On 14:44 23/07/03, Richard Henderson said:


Jonathan Robin withdrew his candidacy from the election.

Therefore, he cannot take up a position on the Panel.

Before the election was over, he was out of it.

yrs,

Richard Henderson

PS: On a secondary point, Jefsey, "failure to vote in 75% of all votes"
means in regular English, that you have "failed" the panel rules if you vote
in 74% or below. On the basis of the panel rules, Andre "failed" and
therefore provided "grounds" for a vote of confidence by the Panel.

What I *do* think this affair raises is the question: "How much freedom does
the Panel have to eject representatives of the members, without the sanction
and confirmation of the membership?"

Behind this is the principle I have been arguing all along, that final
authority for any decision of this organisation should and must rest with
the membership, so that in situations where the membership wishes to express
a direction or viewpoint, there is a mechanism and *constitutional
authority* for the membership to assert its will ... and *not* just at the
next elections, which - in a case like this - would clearly be too late.

----- Original Message -----
From: JFC Morfin @large <jfc@atlarge.ws>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 11:59 AM
Subject: [atlarge-discuss] Panel Motion to put Jonathan Robin on Panel is
illegitimate?


> I am puzzled by this:
>
> On 00:18 23/07/03, Richard Henderson said:
> > >From a Hugh Blair Panel Posting (21st July 2003):
> >
> > >Motion #2003-2 states in part: "the failure of a member to
> > >vote in three (3) successive votes or in 75% of all votes
> > >conducted will be grounds for the panel member's membership be
> > >submitted to a vote of confidence."
> >http://mailman.icannatlarge.org/pipermail/panel/2003-June/000738.html
>
> In good logic (poor English?) this means that a Panlist must
> participate to at least 25% of the votes. If André participated
> to 71% of them I do not see the ground for a motion of
> distrust.
>
> > >Panel member Andre Rebentisch has only voted 7 times out of
> > >a possible 12 Panel votes. That is equal to a 71% voting
> > >attendance record.
>
>
> > >I call for an immediate vote of no-confidence in this member
> > >and his replacement with the next in line, Jonathan Robin.
> >
> >Richard Henderson intervenes:
> >
> >Hugh, regardless of the situation with regard to Andre Rebentisch, I do
not
> >think Jonathon Robin is eligible to be placed on the committee, because
> >during the panel election, he announced his withdrawal from the election.
>
> Jonathan announced his withrawal from the election, the same as Joanna
> did from this list, etc.  I mailed to Jonathan and he was kept on the
lists
> and supported by members. He has accepted the vote of the Members, to
> join the Panel and not to resign.
>
>
> I note that removing a member is NOT a legitimate move of the Panel,
> whatever the Panel may decide. The only _power_ the Panel has is
> to akcnowledge that some member has removed himslef. The mere
> notion of a vote of confidence is absurd (every member can distrust
> the others): this is no TV Game.
>
> The Panel can only say that under a given threshold taking into
> account the right of a Member to disagree with the priciple of some
> votes, one can consider that the Panel Member has actually
> silently resigned.
>
> Concerning Jonathan Robin and his position on the list, you should
> be careful: Joop has resigned Augsut 31st. You should look at
> the next followers (who is to replace Joop and the next(s) you eject)
> and at the support they got. Your legitimacy is from the votes of the
> Members, not from your own self election (all the more than Sotiris
> has several claims agoisnt his own election validity).
>
> The majority of the members as asked for an 11 Member Panel for
> one year. I am no sure you can foot the bill for a long the way you
> go ?
>
> jfc
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 18/07/03


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