[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[atlarge-discuss] RE:last question for Abel Wisman
At 02:42 p.m. 14/05/2003, Abel Wisman wrote:
I am not at war with you, or for that matter with anyone on this list or
even on the internet at large.
Good to know. :-)
I am (this all under the still existing assumption that I was indeed
seconded) more then prepared to sit on a panel and work constructively
towards the common goal and upfront agree to disagree with some, and I
might disagree to agree with others and not even on the same topic.
Yes, I can see where we disagree (pragmatic issues), but I never saw a
reason for the constant innuendo, digs and accusations of doing this work
for my own benefit and your protest against being polled and then against
being not polled.
What I simply do not (want to) understand is all the personal attacks on
people, reputations and opionions that people vent.
Politics is like that. On a mailing list it comes out amplified. We must
both look at our own contributions for possible unintended hostility.
Disagreement, no
matter how strongly felt can be worded courteous instead of ending up in
a flame war.
Indeed it can.
People in this organization, the actives and non-active members alike,
are a part of this organization because the common goal, a democratic
internet governance that crosses all "real world" boundaries, is of
their interest.
Yes.
We dispute the legality of the ALAC, ICANN and others like them, we want
global involvement of all those interested and those with "something to
lose or win" whether they are member of a "constituency" or not.
We do not like that the IP world has taken over all the contracts and
rules and bend them in their favor, like the UDRP and we certainly do
not like the music industry deciding what we share with each other by
instignating a court procedure to every student who has the indecency to
share his disks with others.
Yet instead of working with people in the alternative root, the
icann-tld's and others in making this world a better place we decide to
go to war on each other, giving at the same time other the opportunity
to decide our faith.
I for one at this moment in time do not care in the least whether the
other candidates are seconded or not, just in whether they are willing
to do the job and more importantly whether they are able to do the job.
Clarity about Nominations is just the first step. It is also the easiest.
It helps the voters to make their choices.
It guards against coups.
"Doing the job" must still be defined.
You want each candidate to provide his own definition?
Whether we have 4 or 450 candidates does not matter, those who have the
most votes will be the panel, and if someone is not seconded, then it is
up to her or him to either run or not, if not being seconded was not
enough indication of the probable number of votes to be acquired then
let them await the outcome of the vote and be told by the membership.
Personally I would like to know who seconded me, but as long as I have
the assurance that I was seconded I can live with that.
It is not only you who needs to know, it is the voters who need that
information.
If, for example Hugh Blair seconds you, it is different from Jeff Williams
seconding you, see what I mean?
<snip>
I suggest we leave the path of bickering and flame-wars, that we agree
all that we can disagree, that we will all vote for the candidate we
think is best to get something goin, and hope for the wisdom of those
chosen to not seek to much power and get this show on the road, so the
collective membership can become active in all those processes we want
to participate in or fight against.
Thanks.
I have no hatchet to bury since I have never dug it up in the first
place.
Maybe it was just my imagination. :/
And I sincerely hope you live long enough to ask me many more questions,
which I will gladly answer, providing the language is respectable.
Rest assured of that.
The biggest challenge we all share here is mutual trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de