[ga-full] Re: [ga] Matters to discuss ... Am I a member? Another consideration.

[Weisberg <weisberg@texoma.net>]

Another concern relates to unequal access to the data.  It would be unfair if
some "contestants" have better information regarding the make-up of the
electorate than others, especially if that information can be used to contact
those voters "off-list."  And, there will be a perception of discriminatory
access through the list administrator whether it actually exists or not.

And,  having a membership which is different from the mailing list denies
advocates/candidates a convenient vehicle for communicating with the
membership.  Access to the voters list, overcomes that hurdle.  Some other
vehicle for distributing information before elections may also satisfy that
need.


Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> At 15:12 23.02.00 +1300, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> >At 17:47 22/02/00 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >It is not necessary to publish the names for any purpose related to
> > >voting.
> > >
> >
> >It is. People need to see if they are not omitted from the roll.
>
> This purpose can be served by sending out individual email ballots; if you
> didn't get yours, you're not on the roll (or you have to contact the admins
> to correct your email address).
>
> The other purpose (to assure people that the rolls are fairly kept, with no
> "strange" additions) cannot, I think, be met without publication.



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