Abel Wisman wrote:
I have opposed that motion with the following reason:That is a good point. I think that needs to be discussed in some detail and we need to look at options.
<quote>
I still think this motion is not discussed and simple things are
overseen. A. what is the polling committee to use for tools
B. are they also to organize elections, if so then they cannot be
independent, otherwise they would call for elections whenever they see
fit, thus giving them powers beyond control, if they are not to organize
"elections" then who does that.
Another good point.
C. in how far is any panel (us orI think we ought to use the polls as guages to jude the sentiment of the membership, but you raise yet another good question.
followers) bound by the outcome of their polls
D. who decides on polls with language that is leading to some or objected by others
That is a tough one indeed.
I agree. This motion vote may be a bit premature, but I also think i is a move in the right direction. In any case, the motion itself does not preclude any such discussions, it merely sanctions the formation of the PC When and under what circumstances the PC is formed is another et of matters altogether, methinks.There are many more questions to raise on this subject, yet you choose to simply call a vote immediately, I am appaled. </quote> It is my opinion that this discussion has to be done before even a preliminary vote or setup can be started.