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

RE: [atlarge-discuss] The number 1 problem

Abel:

I am pleased that you, as a candidate yourself, have made the proposal for candidate verification and certification by the Watchdog Committee. I hope the other candidates will come forward as well.

While at this time it might be considered to be a voluntary act on the part of candidates, or anyone else in our organization for that matter, I view it as a critical act, one of confidence in our organization, and one that will definitely influence my voting in the coming election.

I cannot imagine anyone seeking election to the panel not wanting to lead the way by example as you are.

I as a voter will certainly consider examining first the candidates certified by the Watchdog Committee, and absent that certification necessarily make a judgement only from their submitted profiles and links. Currently I am finding that some of those links don't work and, sorry to say, I'm lazy when it comes to tracking back links to find information for folks who presumably want me to vote for them.

I trust that in time we will establish some form of verification and certification requirement for all members. At least I hope we will. I expect it would go a long way to ending some of the nonsense we still experience in our lists and otherwise.

Currently there is an effort among the Watchdog Committee to engage in our own verification submissions, using exactly the kinds and ways of submission as you've proposed, so that we can certify ourselves to each other and all of you in the same manner.

I have already pledged myself, and expect the rest of the committee to as well, to complete confidentiality of people's submissions for verification and certification, and would only report out of the committee that "he/she is verified."

While in general I have no problem with members using pseudonyms for whatever their reasons, be they for personal security or capricious, I do have a problem with candidates for our panel using pseudonyms. I would find it inconsistent with accepting a public responsibility within our organization and would not vote for them.

And as for members with pseudonyms I would still ultimately want them to go through a *confidential* verification and certification process to insure one-person-one-vote, without requiring that their true identity be disclosed by the certifying body. I prefer this body be an icannatlarge body.

For anyone wishing to verify MY identity I am making my driver license -- modified, with street number and license number erased -- available on-line in Adobe Acrobat PDF format at the URL following. You will however need to contact me individually for the password necessary to view it. I trust that this password will not be circulated, rather sought directly from me. I reserve the right to change the password and/or withdraw the document completely at anytime.

http://www.starwalker.org/Starwalker_Driver_License.pdf

/s/ Joey Borda/Bordo

Friday, May 16, 2003 * 7:47 PM EDT

starwalker@gay.com
starwalker@starwalker.org


At 12:03 PM 5/16/2003 +0100, Abel Wisman wrote:

Since I can agree that those standing for election are verified to be
"real" and "living" people and since I think of this as an important
step towards legitimacy for the panel to be, I would like to make a
proposal which considering the fact that more time has been allowed by
the panel anyway can be taken into account and action before the start
of the election:

There are several ways to "verify" whether people are "real" but the
most secure are not alike all over the world, f.i. to notarise in the
USA one can step into ones bank, pay approx $ 2.50 and have it done, to
do so in the Netherlands one would have to go to a notary and pay $ 200

I would suggest that as an added task the "watchdog" committee will
verify the candidates in a not to difficult manner, I would think copies
of government issued id (passport and/or driving license) some form of
"letterhead" with the address of the candidate and perhaps a domain in
their name or other more or less secure means, but all in combination
with the copy of the passport/drivers license would at least take away
most doubts and as an added bonus would certify that the candidate is
over 18 years old, which should be a minimum age imo.

Sending a scan, fax or pdf containing the documents along with a
telephone-number to any (not all) member of the watchdog committee
should suffice.

The watchdog committee assures all candidates that the data they come to
see will not leave their hands and will only serve to verify the
existence of the candidate, which the committee will make know to the
public with a simple: "he/she is verified"

This does not need to be a total organisation wide approved act, if all
candidates agree to this then it can be done.

Kind regards

Abel


-----Original Message-----
From: Joanna Lane [mailto:jo-uk@rcn.com]
Sent: 14 May 2003 23:35
To: Joey Borda **star*walker**; atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
Subject: [atlarge-discuss] The number 1 problem


> From: Joey Borda **star*walker** wrote:-

> (4) Call it what you will, along with continuing polling, I believe
> our first and greatest need is the certification of membership, and
> the election of a panel/committee for that purpose.
>
> I would be willing to volunteer, to stand for election, to such a
> membership certification panel. Again, I can't see nominating people
> who haven't first put up a profile.

I agree that the number 1 problem is ID verification, but disagree with
your timing. The work starts here and now, before this election. For a
start, Bob Crawford has never been certified as a person separate from
Jeff Williams, yet he is standing as a candidate in this election.
Independent verification of candidates must be undertaken before the
ballot papers go out therefore, and what you are suggesting would grow
naturally out of that, so you might want to think about joining the
Watchdog Committee and starting early.

Regards,
Joanna


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


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