Re: [atlarge-discuss] Danny's watchdog help

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

Jefsey,

You have participated in enough elections to understand that:

1.  A group of people need to decide upon the final groundrules for an 
election -- in my view, you have unilaterally altered the rules after the 
election has commenced (and without receiving the tacit approval of the other 
Panelists).

2.  An individual functioning as a Secretariat needs to clearly communicate 
those groundrules to the participants -- in my view, when the election 
announcement refers to seconds, and you later state: "the nominees do not 
need to be seconded", this promotes confusion.
http://www.fitug.de/atlarge-discuss/0305/msg00048.html

3.  Watchdogs need to be selected to authenticate the legitimacy of the 
election -- I haven't noted any official watchdogs at work

4.  The members list needs to be frozen during the election process -- I 
don't know if this was done... it certainly wasn't announced.

5.  A single transparent/archived list needs to be established to which 
members can post nominations with an accompanying statement -- instead 
nominations seem to have appeared in a number of locales:  this list, Joop's 
website, private correspondence to the "Polling Committee"

6.  A single transparent/archived list needs to be established to which 
members can post their endorsements (seconds) -- we still don't know who has 
seconded most of these nominations, although it appears that you made a 
private deal with someone to unilaterally second every single nomination:  
"So we compromised; he accepted to nominate the people I would nominate and I 
would second everyone someone else would nominate."
http://www.fitug.de/atlarge-discuss/0305/msg00203.html

7.  A minimum threshhold of endorsements should be established to determine 
who has sufficient grassroots support to be considered a viable candidate -- 
this has not been done although it is a common procedure in most 
organizations from the GNSO to political parties worldwide.

8.   Ample time needs to be allowed at each stage of the process -- the 
election schedule did not allow enough time.

I am baffled as to why you and others with sufficient experience have 
mismanaged this election process.  All anyone wants is a clean, 
understandable, straight-forward, monitored election.  People that are 
orchestrating the election should not also be involved in nominating 68 
candidates and seconding every single nomination that comes through.  As an 
election coordinator, you were supposed to remain neutral.  

I can only hope that in the soon-to-be-established Charter, the election 
procedures will be unambiguously detailed.

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