Membership criteria - was [ga] NC BS

[Gary Osbourne <gro@direct.ca>]

Could I have some clarification on my status as a member?

As I've stated previously I have considered myself a GA
member since a week after the voting rolls opened two years
ago. I have only recently subscribed to the ga@dnso.org list.

SFAIK I have only been subscribed intermittently to the
announce@dnso.org list. Yet I have always considered myself
a GA member, and SFAIK have voted each time a vote occurred.

Further, SFAIK I have been listed without interruption on
the voting roll since I first joined on May 21 or 22, 2000.

Am I now to understand that this was in error? Again SFAIK
I have never had my vote challenged by the committee which
oversees the vote, or anyone else. I understood the following
clause from here:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-voting-registry.html
to read in the following fashion (and still do):

 > The following rules are suggested for the initial
 > GA voting roll:

I take it these rules have not been superceded?

 > The DNSO General Assembly is composed of those
 > persons who want to be members of that assembly.

I was/am a person who wants to be a member of that
assembly.

 > At present, this includes "ex-officio" the
 > subscribers to the GA-lists, the participants
 > to the DNSO Constituencies and the participants
 > to the Working Groups.

What this doesn't say is:

 > At present, this **only** includes "ex-officio"
 > the subscribers to the GA-lists, the participants
 > to the DNSO Constituencies and the participants
 > to the Working Groups.

If it meant *only* those members, why doesn't
it explicitly say so?

I took it to mean that members of those three
named groups were automatically voting members,
not that they were the only voting members.

Others such as myself, who only registered to
be on the voting roll, I also took to be members
of the GA. I understood that I had applied for
membership, that that membership was accepted,
that I could vote, and that when I did it would
be counted as a valid vote (which SFAIK is what
actually occurred on numerous occasions).

If that wasn't the case, why was I, and I
know I'm not the only one in this situation,
allowed to register? Why not just take those
considered members of those three groups and
combine them to form the voting roll, if those
are the only ones allowed to vote? When the
election oversight committee checks ballots,
do they check them against the voting roll
or the memberships of those three groups?

If only those three groups can vote, presumably
they would use the latter, and if so, presumably
I would not have had my vote counted. Yet it
seems to have been counted during various votes.

And why the inclusion of ex-officio, approximately:
without the rights of an(other) office? What
office are they vacating? If *only* members of
those lists can be on the voting registry, they
aren't giving up any office. Further, ex-officio
is often included to mean that one may not pull
a rank of office held elsewhere on others who don't
hold the same or higher rank of office.

I took this to mean that while some members might
also be GA list subscribers, or participants in
Constituencies, or Working Group, when it came to
the voting roll, all were equal. Otherwise, why
include that phrase?

In my own case, as I travel extensively, sometimes
sans connection, I didn't find constant subscription
to the GA list as manageable. Does that mean I am
not a member of the GA? While I could be a member
of a Constituency (or two), I am not. Does that
mean I'm not a member? I don't see any Working
Groups around to join. Does that mean I'm not a
member? And while travelling I have sometimes
subscribed to the announce list using web-mail.
Does that mean I am more than one member?

I hasten to add I have only ever voted once per
called vote, and always from the same address
as recorded in the voting roll.

 > A Member has the right to vote in a GA vote.

As I have already quoted:

 > The DNSO General Assembly is composed of those
 > persons who want to be members of that assembly.

I claim to be a person, I claim to want to be a
member of the DNSO GA by signing up to the voting
roll through use of a template (not necessarily
by joining a list, or a Constituency, or Working
Group, and if those members are automatically
members, and the only members, for whom was the
template provided?) so from my reading of this,
by signing up via the template, I am a member.

 > All members who wish to vote in a GA vote must
 > register with the GA voting registry.

I did that.

 > To register, one must send an email to the
 > Keeper of the Voting Registry (a secretariat
 > function) asking to become a member, and giving:
 > First Name
 > Last Name
 > Country of residence
 > Optionally, ...
 > Optionally, ...
 > Email to be used for balloting

I did that too, sans options.

 > All the information except the email will be
 > made public. A template is given below; USE THIS.

I did that too the first time as near as I recall.

If only the three listed groups can be voting
members, and as most parts of those three groups,
including all of the GA, have publicly archived
records of email, why would there be a clause
included saying that the voting roll email list
wouldn't be published. If only those groups can
vote, someone wanting the email of those members
who could vote could find most of them elsewhere.
Why then is the voting roll singled out for privacy
if it is only a duplication of memberships elsewhere?

 > The Keeper of the Registry keeps an updated
 > Web page listing all the Members listed in the
 > voting registry, see:
 > http://www.dnso.org/secretariat/rosterindex.html

And there I am, though as I explained in an earlier
post, the date is wrong. That is not the date I
joined, I assume it is is the date I last updated
my contact info.

 > A Member can be removed from the voting registry
 > by:
 > A request from the Member to be removed
 > A procedure for dealing with fraudulent
 > registrations (see below).

I have never requested to be removed, nor SFAIK has
my registration ever been claimed to be fraudulent.

 > A registered Member has the duty to receive GA
 > vote ballots, and to keep his registration info
 > updated.

I have done that too.

And, except for the fraudulent registration clause,
that's about it. As near as I can tell I have done
everything necessary to be, and remain, a GA member
in good standing. Am I now to understand that that
wasn't the case? Am I also to understand that the
only difference between being a member and not being
a member could be whether one subscribes to an
announce list? That seems a rather arbitrary
distinction, it bars membership only to persons
who don't have an email address, and they couldn't
exercise a vote anyway.

While I don't think I've run afoul of the
fraudulent registration clause to date, I'll
include its main part here as I think it
also supports my reading of the rules:

 > The procedure for dealing with fraudulent
 > registrations is very similar to that for
 > multiple registrations on the GA discussion
 > list:...

If one has multiple registrations on the GA
discussion list, wouldn't those automatically
mean multiple registrations on the voting list
by the reading of the rules I am arguing against?
Why then draw this distinction, isn't it redundant?

If one complains of fraudulent multiple
registrations on the GA list and the others
are cancelled, they would also be cancelled
in the voting roll. This clause appears to
be for those who are on the voting roll but
not on the GA list, and it doesn't say anything
about them being a Constituency member or
Working group member. This is not aimed at
the same person at the same email address who
may be a member of more than one of these
groups. It is aimed at someone having multiple
registrations specifically on the voting roll.
If one cannot register only for the voting roll,
why would this clause be included?

As I am now subbed to the GA list I would seem
to be safe, but am I to understand that at least
some of my prior votes should not have been
counted? And is it likely that I am the only
person in such a position?

Color me confused. Please advise. Thx. -g

At 12:08 AM 17/05/02 +0200, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:
>The rules
>http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-voting-registry.html
>state:
>     The DNSO General Assembly is composed of those persons
>     who want to be members of that assembly. At present,
>     this includes "ex-officio" the subscribers to the GA-lists,
>     the participants to the DNSO Constituencies and the
>     participants to the Working Groups.
>
>Please note "the GA-lists", i.e. ga@dnso.org and announce@dnso.org
>While the first one is sometimes noisy, the second is on average
>1-2 emails a week, from the Secretariat.
>Therefore you may be a member of the GA without getting a huge
>traffic and filtering it into folders, but rather reading archives.

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html