Re: [wg-c] ballot stuffing

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 02:24 PM 12/10/1999 , Kevin J. Connolly wrote:
>This note, however, is motivated by a different
>consideration, namely, that of being attacked
>as a no-compromise unthinker by a participant
>whose characterization by me would certainly
>be counterproductive.

I probably misunderstand your note, but feel that it warrants a 
response.  To the extent that none of what follows is what you are 
concerned about, I offer it as general comments to the list, rather than 
just a specific response to you:

1.  Unless I missed the note, there hasn't been one attacking you.  (The 
downside of filtering messages is that one can easily miss such things...)

2.  Messages on this thread, starting with mine, have not discussed anyone 
specifically, other than a couple of responses that tossed off some ad 
hominems about me.

In particular, my original note attempted to define a "class" of 
voters.  Most notable among the criteria for that class was no history of 
participating in this discussion -- and the "in this working group" seemed 
an obvious referent, though apparently not obvious enough.  One would be 
hard-pressed to count you as a non-participant...

Just to underscore the concern I was raising:  The problem is not with 
anyone voting no, but rather an apparent campaign that was developed to 
create a pattern of no's.  There is a difference between individuals voting 
no versus an organized campaign to stuff the ballot box.  Hence the choice 
of Subject line text.

Yes, that's a conspiracy theory and no, I don't have any "proof".  That's 
why I detailed the basis for my assessment pretty carefully.

In any event the intent was to highlight a process difficulty for which 
there is no obvious solution, rather than to complain about individuals -- 
or even groups.

d/

=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker  <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg Consulting  <www.brandenburg.com>
Tel: +1.408.246.8253,  Fax: +1.408.273.6464
675 Spruce Drive,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA