Re: [atlarge-discuss] Apology and Explanation for Joop

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: <bruce@barelyadequate.info>

> I have no
> problem with Joop conducting polls.  But barring the will of the
membership
> otherwise, I have a real problem with the falacious assumption that they
> reflect the will of the membership, particularly when the full membership
> was not made aware of the pending poll, and only about 20% of our
registered
> membership participated.

Only about 20% of our registered members participated in last week's
election too...

The other interesting thing was that people expressed readiness to continue
using the Poll on a regular basis.

The real issue is how to give the Poll (a) enhanced credibility (b) a formal
constitutional role

Joop's Poll was a brave voice representing the actual opinions of actual
members, at a time when the Panel was inert and in danger of hijacking this
organisation to ICANNland and ALAC.

Joop's Poll, for all its critics, has fantastic potential. I believe the
membership in significant numbers has already expressed this. If you had a
vote today and asked:

"Do you support a regular (once a month) Poll?"

I am convinced the majority of members would say "Yes."

We - as members - need to keep control of this organisation, and define its
course, and stand by if the Panel goes wrong (which we all know panels
can)...

This does not mean micro-management... this means real grassroots democratic
involvement, instead of just delegating and saying, "Oh well, the panel will
be accountable at the next election".

Very often, the next election is too late.

A Polling Mechanism needs to be right at the heart of our Member's
Organisation!

yrs

Richard H



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