RE: [atlarge-discuss] Proposal: How to Replace Panel Members...

["Jeff Holt" <jefftttt@txucom.net>]

Walt and fellow members,

Not at all.  While there is a portion of the current "Panel" making the
attempt as you say, there remains also the rest.  As for those who were
not "elected", some have still been keeping in touch.  In the short time
since the so-called election with its controversy, the rest of the
candidates no doubt have withdrawn to observe more than participate, a
natural reaction to such a loss.

And I did not suggest that THIS Panel is already a clique, merely that
by setting precedent of allowing replacements by "Invitation" it would
open that possibility in the future.  It would be preferable to hold an
interim election if necessary and the practice of filling vacant seats
from the pre-qualified candidates meets with resistance.  But, like
filling a jury from the jury panel, with a pool of viable candidates
available, why go through the mess of an entire election process again?
Even though the majority of the candidates who failed to be elected have
seemingly disappeared, the highest ranking ones are still observing and
have even Posted...  Right, Mauro? 

So while I agree that we need to make progress and move on, I do not
think reacting without thought for the future is the best course. We
should take pains to institute better By-laws and not be setting
precedents which might come back to haunt us later.

Sincerely,
 
Jeff Holt
Jefftttt@txucom.net
www.tejas-info-services.com
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Schmidt [mailto:walts@dorsai.org] 
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 11:19 AM
To: Atlarge Discuss List
Cc: Walter Schmidt
Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] Proposal: How to Replace Panel Members...

On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Jeff Holt wrote:

> Absolutely NOT!  And let those seated fill the remaining chairs with
> their cronies of like mind?  That would be a prescription for the
> formation of a "ruling class" or clique....

   ...let me try and understand this

We elected a panel of 11 who garnered over 57% of our vote, averaging a
little over 5% of the votes each. They are our panel, elected by us,
initially "new" to each other, and now having worked together.  They
have
been active.

The unelected 16 have, for all extent and purposes, disappeared back
into
that from which they came.

But, when our Panel asks us for some guidance, when we have seen neither
hide nor hair of the unelected 16 since the election, a group by the
way who averaged only a little over half the votes each - 2.6%:
 - we refuse to react to the new facts
 - we all of a sudden call our Panel "cronies"
 - and we suggest that if they were to suggest individuals to fill
vacancies that would be "a prescription for the formation of a "ruling
class" or clique"

Huh?

I would rather be proactive and make changes as the facts demand, than
hang my hat on the fact that "well, that's what we said we would do,
yesterday..."



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