Re: [atlarge-discuss] Vendetta against Sotiris?

["Ron Sherwood" <sherwood@islands.vi>]

Thank you, Richard, for so eloquently summing up the situation for us.  I do
not believe that there is a vendetta against Sotiris, as much as his
constantly antagonistic attitude creates a constantly negative response.

Of course Sotiris was elected (just), and of course he should take his seat.
Jefsey's report is simply that, a factual report that shows who complied
with the process, who did not, and what the ranking was based upon
compliance with the criteria used.

I suspect that, if Sotiris were to listen to his critics and moderate his
language, there would be far greater support for his position on various
topics. Sometimes the type of attitude that Sotiris displays is considered
feisty and progressive... more often it is considered aggressively negative,
counter productive and just plain rude.

Those who try to pretend that Sotiris was not elected are probably just
exposing their dislike of his character and his manner of interaction with
others who post to this list.  Their wish to not have him removed from the
leadership team is understandable, but wrong.

Ron Sherwood

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 9:51 AM
Subject: [atlarge-discuss] Vendetta against Sotiris?


> I can see the reasoning behind some people's argument for removing Sotiris
> from the panel. A parallel might be the opposition that existed in UK to
the
> IRA being allowed democratic seats as long as they refused to abandon
their
> weapons. In rejecting the electoral process, they were perceived by some
as
> ineligible because - not acknowledging the legitimacy of any elections -
> they might at any stage resort to other means.
>
> Moreover, Sotiris's style is problematical to some.
>
> However, I am really and sincerely concerned that there is a vendetta
going
> on against him just because he's antagonised some people. To take the IRA
> parallel further, the fact remained that large numbers of people wanted
them
> (or their political wing Sinn Fein) to represent them.
>
> I am sceptical about some people's motives, however much their actions can
> be backed up by 'logic'.
>
> I am concerned to see this organisation gain a reputation for genuine
> democratic process, because we need to be able to demonstrate this, in
order
> to argue the case for democratic representation on the ICANN Board. We
need
> to demonstrate that it can be done.
>
> Sotiris didn't accept the election methods and processes, but - short of
> giving up the fight - he had no real alternative except to go along with
it,
> protesting all the way.
>
> Just because he does not accept the process that took place does not mean
> (logically) that either (a) people weren't allowed to vote for him (they
> did); or (b) that he did not wish to represent them (he does).
>
> People want him to represent them. He wants to represent them. If, in
> between, the process was or was not legitimate, it is nevertheless
entirely
> consistent that people (who may also question the process) *still* want
him
> to represent them and that he *still* wants to represent them.
>
> Just because he objects to the process does not mean that the democratic
> will cannot be carried out.
>
> I repeat, it is perfectly clear to me that a vendetta is being waged
against
> Sotiris by some people who just don't like his style. The democratic
> integrity of the recent election needs to be demonstrated by an enquiry by
> an Electoral Commission charged with organising future elections; and the
> democratic integrity of the recent election needs to be demonstrated by
> respecting the wishes of the people who voted for Sotiris.
>
> If, as you have argued, the election was fair, then you should accept the
> wish of the electorate to have Sotiris on the panel.
>
> This, too, is a logical argument which deserves some recognition of being
> reasonable.
>
> My motive, as I say, is not vendetta or favouritism for Sotiris, but
defence
> of the democratic process... without which, we can never present a moral
> case for ICANN, too, to introduce democratic processes and integrity.
>
>
> Yrs,
>
> Richard Henderson
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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