Re: [atlarge-discuss] The VOTE on the Polling Commission

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

Richard and all fellow members,

  First of all we all really already know that the so called
"polling commission" is of questionable legitimacy.

  Second, we don't have a "Constitution" by which to measure
or judge any "Constitutional questions".

Third, a set of bylaws vetted and determined by the membership
as a whole would be our Constitution.  It is here and with our
Charter and mission statement where we actually need to
start.  From the completion of a good basic and encompassing
set bylaws, Charter, and to a lessor degree a mission statement,
we can actually start to build and consider such things as
a "polling Committee".

Richard Henderson wrote:

> Thanks Abel
>
> However this does not quite answer my constitutional question which was:
>
> Where Panel opinion and Membership opinion diverge, whose opinion will take
> precedence?
>
> Should the first Poll ask this important constitutional question?
>
> I accept that there is further definition to be put in place concerning the
> size of the vote needed to make it authoritative, but given a well-supported
> vote, will the Panel concede that the Members have a right to over-rule
> them, and will this right of the Membership be written into our constitution
> (or at least, into the rules for the Polling Commission)?
>
> An issue like this cannot be left vague, and as it is central to the
> organisation, I believe it is a key first question to put to the Membership,
> so that the Membership itself can, bottom-up, claim this constitutional
> right for itself if it so desires.
>
> yrs,
>
> Richard H
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Abel Wisman <abel@able-towers.com>
> To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 12:45 AM
> Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] The VOTE on the Polling Commission
>
> > Richard,
> >
> > The motion that was the groundwork for this current charter was #2003-10
> >
> > What this panel-comm did was merely in conjunction with that motion lay
> > down the ground rules for that comm.
> > The next step is organizing the elections for the members of that comm.
> >
> > In the mean time the panel will continue the work on the by-laws and
> > incorporation of which this comm will be a part.
> > We will also in the mean time try and come up with standards as to when
> > and how a poll will be either binding or strong advice to the panel.
> > The hardest part will be what numbers we are going to set, which in turn
> > will be partially dependant of the number of verified members in this
> > organization so that a reasonable percentage can be given to a poll to
> > be binding or advisory or just gained knowledge. Of course the question
> > itself will be important in that reasoning as well.
> >
> > At the very least shall the panel use the outcome of the polls as her
> > lead towards her actions and write out elections should such be needed
> > in the light of an outcome of a poll.
> >
> > It will not be a matter of difference of opinion, but whether it is
> > workable, and more importantly representative for the entire membership.
> >
> > Hope this answers the question on this work in progress which for that
> > same reason is not moved in the form of a real motion, since there is
> > already a motion that constitutes the outcome, we are merely proposing
> > some "rules" to go by before we start organizing the election.
> >
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Abel
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Richard Henderson [mailto:richardhenderson@ntlworld.com]
> > > Sent: 18 July 2003 22:08
> > > To: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
> > > Subject: [atlarge-discuss] The VOTE on the Polling Commission
> > >
> > >
> > > HelpThis is clearly a very significant Panel VOTE going on to
> > > determine the nature and work of the future Polling Commission:
> > >
> > http://mailman.icannatlarge.org/pipermail/panel/2003-July/001004.html
> >
> > Given that the VOTE has already begun, could the Panel please define the
> > relationship between Poll results expressing the wishes of the
> > membership, and the degree to which such results will bind the Panel?
> >
> > In otherwords, where Panel opinion and Membership opinion diverge, whose
> > opinion will take precedence?
> >
> > Should the first Poll ask this important constitutional question?
> >
> >
> > yrs,
> >
> >
> > Richard H
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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

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