Re: [atlarge-discuss] New panel elections?

[sotiris@hermesnetwork.com]

> I have not made my mind on this yet.
> 
>>From one side, it is evident that a good part of the panel has decided
> to neglect their original commitment, or doesn't believe any more in
> the organization, or whatever - but they have stopped participating, up
> to the point of almost paralyzing the panel's activity.

Almost?  The Panel seized functioning some time ago.  How many Panel 
members are left?  James Love is also a scratch...  Let's face it Vittorio 
you have failed, as a Chair, and a Panel.  Your ex cathedra pronouncements 
at this point are irrelevant.

> 
> It is true that we may replace them with the next in line from last
> elections, but we still have to understand whether the new ones would
> be more motivated and active, and the more original members you
> replace, the weaker (politically) the panel will be.

And where has the Panel's "political strength" heretofore gotten us?  BS

> 
>>From the other side, it is also true that if we believe in democracy,
> we have to believe in its rules; and that it is very dangerous to let
> democratically elected bodies be dismissed by the pressure of a
>self-organized mass effort. 

Not if the "democratically elected bodies" are shams. Give it up Vittorio.  
Step aside. 

>This poll was conducted unofficially and
>without having been approved by the organization, so while I have no
>reason to say that its results aren't true, I also have no reason to say
>that they can represent a binding direction to the panel.

What panel?  Where is the panel?  How many panel members are left?  Five? 
One?  Two?  You are out of order Mr. Chair, of a defunct and abandoned 
panel.  I suppose your plan is to now try and keep us in limbo until August 
because you're claiming some kind of legitimacy which has long since 
dissolved, and you have not earned in any case.  Where's your 
polling/voting mechanism?  You've still to produce your promised facility.  
Yeah right...  Go away Vittorio. 
 
> When the panel was initially elected, it was due to expire next
> August, and there are no provisions for new panel elections unless the
> panel expires or all the possible panel members, including valid
> replacements, resign. So if we want to achieve new elections, formally
> we still have to ask to all these people to resign (or not to accept to
> enter the panel). But it is also true that our rules are still at a
> draft status, and surely incomplete. So, for example, a formal
> membership vote might in my opinion remove the whole panel - but such
> vote, presently, can only be instated by the panel itself.

BS!  This panel you keep referring to has dissolved itself already, you 
don't even have quorum!  End of game Vittorio.  

> 
> Moreover, the panel was also due to accomplish targets that,
> presently, seem to be unrealistic, because there's plenty of
> disagreement on what they are and how they are to be reached, and
> total scarcity of people actively willing to pursue them. So it is true
> that a replacement panel would perhaps only delay the problem and let
> the organization lose some more months.

HA!  That's rich.  How many months has the current panel done NOTHING?

> 
> So I'll take more views from panelists and members, and then I'll try
> to follow one of the two realistic options: either the remaining
> members of the panel decide to officially ask the membership about
> having new panel elections, or they do not decide to do so, and in this
> case I will start to call replacements in the panel; in this
> case, once no more replacements can be found, the vacant places in the
> panel may be filled by a new election.

Third realistic option: Do the right thing!  Step down and stay out of the 
way.

> 
> I may add that, personally, I would like to have a chance to be more
> active, ie to call for elections tomorrow, or to start doing things on
> my own. But, apart from the fact that my time and strength is not
> unlimited, as Chair of an organization which claims to desire to
> implement online democracy, I take the word "democracy" seriously. The
> burdens of democratical policy-making processes, which require lots of
> time and effort, may prove excessive for us at this stage, so that we
> end up being perfectly legitimate and perfectly inactive. But the
> whole effort was designed to be like this, and not just another effort
> centered on the skills and activities of just one leader.

Don't flatter yourself VB, you're not that "one leader".  You've displayed 
ZERO skills and NO activities which would qualify you for any such title 
among us.  Perhaps Court Jester for ICANN, but not "leader" among this 
group.. oh no, buddy.  No way.

Step aside.  Now.

Sotiris Sotiropoulos



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