Re: [atlarge-discuss] [Fwd: Re: [Panel] Proposal for agenda]

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

First off, I want to thank Ron for this email.

Ron Sherwood wrote:

> Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>  
> > I have a real problem with this motion. 1) I do not think it's necessary
> > to appoint a chair of the verification committee, it can rotate just as
> > on the panel. 2) I don't think it's the membership's wish that the Panel
> > appoint any Chairs of any committees 3) the verification of the panel
> > Members must take place by the Provisional Membership Committee now
> > forming before ANY of the mothions can be voted upon.
> >    
> Good evening, Sotiris:
>
> May I address your numbered points above.
>
> 1) It is my experience that any committee should have a chairperson. Someone
> to keep discussion on topic, maintain order, keep member tasks to a time
> line and to report on behalf of the committee.  It is a simple, proven,
> efficient method of keeping things on track and on time.  The Chairperson is
> also the contact person for anyone wishing to interact with the committee.
> The committee should choose its own chairperson.
The current Panel members are discussing implementing a rotating chair 
which is quite possibly an excellent idea.  I think this model should be 
emulated by all the committees that we form.  This way, participation 
means just that!  What do you think of a rotating chair model for the 
verification committee, are you willing to consider it?

> 2) I agree. I do not think it is the membership wish that the Panel appoints
> any committee chairs.  In this case, your point would be valid only if every
> member of the committee, was a member of the Panel.  That should not be the
> case, and the committee should choose its own chairperson.  Any committee
> member may propose such a person and the committee will vote on the issue.
As above, I'd like to know how you feel about a rotating chair?  
> 3) I agree that all Panel members should be verified by a membership
> committee that consists of verified members, but I don't why the unverified
> "applicants" for a place on your committee, MUST be a part of the Panel
> verification process.
>
> Sotiris: What is wrong with the verified persons on your Provisional
> Membership Committee list working together now to complete the verification
> of the Panel. 
Nothing is wrong with it, except that there may be others out there who 
may still want to join and we ought to give them a reasonable time 
window to do so.  Your own experience as a latecomer to the election is 
a good case in point. But, if nobody else has presented themselves by 
the 7th, I see no reason why the verified members of the committee 
cannot proceed to coordinate their efforts to verify the panel members.   
> As soon as that is completed. The committee can then move on
> to other work as determined by the Panel. If the Panel feels that the
> committee is not doing its job competently, or if by some weird chance they
> felt that a membership verification and privacy committee is no longer
> needed, they could propose to the membership that it be changed, replaced,
> or disbanded.
No argument from me, if it's a verified membership that ultimately 
decides.  ;-)

> Since Joey Borda is not a Panel member, I would certainly support him as
> chairman of the committee.
I wuld rather see a rotating chair which would facilitate a more active 
and overall productive committee.  But, if I had to choose one of the 
members, it would not be Joe Bordo, as I believe his verification 
standards are not adequately stringent (and that's my opinion and iam 
entitled to it).  Instead, I would support Micheal Sherrill as the 
Chair, if we didn't go with a rotation model.

Best Regards,

--Sotiris Sotiropoulos



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