Re: [atlarge-discuss] what most members want

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Joop and all fellow members,

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> At 08:29 a.m. 3/04/2003, DPF wrote:
>
> >To be precise, the majority of people who took part in an unofficial
> >poll in your voting booth said they prefer to use the voting booth.
> >This is hardly surprising.
>
> They could also have rejected the Booth, if they didn't like it.

  Than what good is it?

>
> The Poll is not for generating surprises, but for settling issues that hold
> us up.

  Indeed it COULD be used for this purpose.  However more often
than not, your Booth, sadly, has not been used for that purpose.
Rather the Poll questions that YOU have absolute control over
to be entered are those that are slanted in a manner that suits
your personal agenda for this atlarge fledgling organization.

>
>
> >  If the questions had been asked through
> >the GNSO e-mail ballot system them a majority would have probably said
> >they prefer that way.
>
> The only way to prove that is to ask the questions again, but then through
> Kent Crispin's system (a.k.a the GNSO system).
> Can you arrange that within the next 3 months?
> I will abide by any democratic result.

  Nice shifting of spin here Joop.  But I hope you don't believe
anyone is going to fall for this amateurish nonsense...???

>
>
> >ALso the phrasing of the questions was horrendous and absolutely
> >leading.  This is something I know about with eight years professional
> >involvement in writing non leading poll questions.  Describing one
> >option as "Asking Elizabeth to do it" instead of "Using the GNSO
> >Secretariat e-mail ballot" meant of course hardly anyone would pick
> >that one.
>
> Agree. That question was not one of mine.

   Is this hindsight or foresight?  In any event, you put it into your
Polling Booth system, didn't you?  As such I suspect, but do not
know, that you liked the wording of this particular entry, but now
being called on it, have decided to re-spin a bit to cover yourself...
<Sigh>  again some of us here have seen all of this before on the
now defunct IDNO...

>
>
> I also agree that it *is* difficult to ask non-leading questions and that
> it is necessary to discuss text in committee , rather than let one
> individial do it alone.

  It is not difficult at all unless you have a specific agenda...

>
> But your criticism is overly harsh.

  Honesty is sometimes harsh...

>
>
> The problem with leading questions is not in that they lead, it is in that
> there are not enough options for answers.

  Also nonsense.  Leading questions are leading by design.

>
> The people here are no fools. If they don't like the options for answers,
> they use the comment line.

  The comment line in your polling booth is not counted in a tally
of the poll question...

>
> If  bias is blatant, opposing  voters make that backfire.
> Among well-informed participants  I do not have such a problem with leading
> questions as long as any member can put such questions forward and as long
> as there is a broad variety of them.
>
> Would you please put your experience in working for a political party to
> the use of the At Large by accepting a nomination on the Polling Commission?
>
> Please, is there anyone who wants to nominate Mr Farrar?
>
> >The GNSO system is actually very secure.  It is almost fraud proof as
> >if someone votes from your e-mail address you get details of the vote,
> >and also you get to see in the results how your vote was recorded so
> >one can be sure the totals are correct.
>
> The biggest problems with it:
>
> 1. It makes icannatlarge dependent on the ICANN GNSO.
> 2. the members don't know where the raw results end up.
>
> >DPF
> >--
> >E-mail: david@farrar.com
> >ICQ:    29964527
> >MSN:    dpf666@hotmail.com
>
> -Those who profess to believe in direct democracy pass the real test when
> they disagree with a result, but still respect it.-
>
> -joop
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801



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