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

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Richard and all fellow members,

  Thank you again Richard for your excellent remarks and
very excellent questions, which seems to be the norm for you. >:)

  Indeed a reliable, independent and easy to use Polling mechanism
is at the hart of a fledgling organization such as this one.  Joops
Polling Booth is in and of itself a very good Polling tool.  That
is in my opinion without a doubt of a reasonable person.  But
the problem with Joops Polling Booth tool is whom is managing
or operating it as that person(s) can manipulate the results
before said results are than posted.  This could be fixed
programmatically to be sure, but that would entail a significant
investment in time, expertise, and money that I don't think
Joop could actually provide or should.  I also doubt that the
membership has the will to garner said expertise, and funding,
not mention the time that would likely to be required to
address these likely requirements.

  Therefore, I have as  you know, suggested on a number of occasions
that it would be cheaper, easier, and likely better to purchase or
lease polling services and/or software by which would insure
the posted results matched exactly the entries on polls taken
by those participating.

Richard Henderson wrote:

> ----- 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

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801



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