RE: [wg-c] WG C Straw Pole vote

["Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@psi-japan.com>]

At 22:47 31-08-1999 -0400, Jonathan Weinberg wrote:
>         The gist of the NC's complaint, as set out in the text of the
>motion and Amadeu's explanation, is that we're failing because we're not
>making progress.  I think Javier is right that we should start preparing a
>memo that sets out our various views, and the arguments in each direction,
>so that even if we make no further progress towards consensus we can still
>present the DNSO with a clear set of options.  But it's neither
>illegitimate, nor inconsistent with the NC motion, for us at the same time
>to try and make some progress towards consensus.  Had we done more of that
>sooner, the NC wouldn't have needed to pass the motion at all.

Dear Jonathan:

I see our problem akin to a meeting which is disrupted by 
hecklers.  Someone posts a note with some substance and certain persons 
start picking it apart, jump on their horses and, like Don Quixote, gallop 
off in all directions.  The resultant plethora of postings on a given 
thread often have little relationship to the subject line.

Like I said, "The fill in the background till the foreground goes underground.

I think your straw ballot was constructive.  I think it is time for a votebot.

We had the same thing early on in CORE.  Several vocal members made it 
sound as though there was a consensus for an issue.  We took a votebot and 
their position was defeated by over 78% of the members.

Let's vote!

Thank you for your leadership.

Personal regards,
BobC



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert's Rule of Problems.

(The sum of Hypothetical situations/The sum of Real problems)>=10

(c) Robert F. Connelly, 1999
Quotation, with attribution, authorised without written request;-)