Re: [ga] Precedence/ GA Structure
Monday, Monday, January 07, 2002, 10:10:37 PM, William S. Lovell wrote:
> Let me say I agree with Eric that the rfc's he cites below are examples
> of the kinds of organization needed to carry out votes. Those who may
> have been lurking over what's going on in the IDNO right now might
> wonder whether its procedures might have been helped by haveing such
> a set of unambiguous rules. However, one must not mix apples and oranges
Not really. What is happening in the IDNO is that, for the first time
in a long time, Joop Teernstra has not been able to manipulate the
situation to get what he wanted over the decision of the majority of
other participants. The only thing going on, besides an election that
is being run by standards of openness and transparency and
accountability, is that Joop is throwing a temper tantrum that his
proprietary, closed sourced, polling booth, hosted on a server which
he is the administrator of, and which has been the subject of a lot of
controversy on in the IDNO, is not being used, and that instead, a
public process is being used which removes any and all doubt as to the
outcome of the election.
It is notable that not one person on the IDNO has supported his
What is most notable, is that this is the first time in a very long
time that the IDNO has been able to do something that Joop didn't
approve of or agree with, despite his machinations to try and get his
way. That bodes well for the future of the IDNO as an organization.
William X Walsh <email@example.com>
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html