RE: [atlarge-discuss] 11 Member Panel

["Abel Wisman" <abel@able-towers.com>]

According to the current outcome of the vote :

=>73  should maintain stability for one year      :   80(Y) -    6(N)
=>74  next Panel should count 11 Members          :   49(Y) -   10(N)
=>75  next Panel should count  9 Members          :   17(Y) -   11(N)
=>76  next Panel should count  7 Members          :   17(Y) -    8(N)
=>77  next Panel should count  5 Members          :    7(Y) -   13(N)


Since you already agreed that 216 votes was sufficient, I submit that
this outcome states quite clearly that the membership wants an eleven
(11) member panel.


Kind regards

Abel



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joop Teernstra [mailto:terastra@terabytz.co.nz] 
> Sent: 01 June 2003 14:40
> To: Ron Sherwood; Sotiris Sotiropoulos; At Large Discuss
> Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] 11 Member Panel
> 
> 
> At 01:11 a.m. 2/06/2003, Ron Sherwood wrote:
> >Good morning, Sotiris:
> >
> >You wrote:
> > > With respect to the 11 member panel.  In the event that 
> one or more 
> > > of the elected Panelists proves to be unverifiable, I think it's 
> > > best the Panel be reduced in size rather than have any 
> replacements 
> > > promoted from the candidates who did not make the top 11.
> >
> >I absolutely disagree with your proposal.
> >
> >Under no circumstances should the number of panelists be reduced.
> 
> Why, Ron? The number of 11 has been forced upon us against 
> the will of most 
> of the members.
> 
> >Your
> >suggestions that the Panel be limited to a quorum of 4 and 
> be reduced 
> >in number through the disqualification process opens the Panel to 
> >capture and abuse by 4 people.
> 
> Even 3 people can capture the panel. If the quorum is 4 , 3 
> is a majority. Three out of eleven. That is unacceptable.
> 
> >We need 11 Panelists.
> 
> Not for preparing legitimate elections for a Polling 
> Commission and then 
> letting them organize proper elections for a new panel of a 
> size set by the 
> membership.
> 
> >A minimum of 6 participants for a quorum.
> 
> And let 4 be a majority? Out of 11?
> 
> >ALL Panelists must be copied on ALL discussion.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> >ALL Panelists must be called to vote.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> >Failure to participate must lead to replacement NOT attrition.
> 
> Agree with that.
> 
> -joop-
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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