Re: [ga] List moderation

["William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>]

On 12-Nov-99 Joop Teernstra wrote:
> At 06:02 PM 11/11/1999 -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:
>>
>>On 11-Nov-99 idno@tallship.net wrote:
>>> Just a real quick one here for clarification...
>>> 
>>> The most recent election saw an overwhelming 9 (spelled nine) members
>>> voting to carry a proposal unanimously. No one can be sure, but the
>>> membership as I last heard stood at about 125 people, including one named
>>> anonymous and one with two peoples names - a guy and a girl. go figure.
>>> 
>>> 9 people voted. that's hilarious.
>>
> 
> And, with permission of the list, a (hopefully final) reply to clarify
> further. The vote was a discussion list vote, where about 35 members
> participate. It was not an election, but an open list vote,  with the
> result that people who do not like to expose their position publicly will
> not vote.
> It was a 24 hour vote as directed by the Chair, Arnold Gehring.

Just can't seem to get past the facts, Joop.  You still have to try and tell ...
falsehoods to minimize the impact of the truth I see, just as you have all along.

In fact, the day I left, which is the day the voting began, there were 52 members. 
Even just counting those numbers, that is roughly 1/6 of the members of that list, a
little more than 15%. 

I will also point out that when 1 vote short of half of the steering committee
voted to appointed you and 2 others to the polling committee, you credited it as a
valid polling, and indeed still do to this day.  Yet when a week later that same
group voted on the List Moderation rules, your argument to invalidate them was that
they didn't have a quorum voting.  This was merely because you didn't agree with it.
Of course, the balloting for the Steering Committee was not unanimous, but the
voting for the moderation rules WAS.  Interesting, to say the least.

I wonder, if that most recent balloting of the IDNO list had not gone your way,
would you have used the same argument then?

> The re-railing proposal was ratified by 16 members, with 4 voting against.
> In the key Vote for or against direct democracy, 44 voters participated.

Wrong.  Please do not count twice the people who voted for 2 options, as your flawed
voting method permitted them to vote for multiple options.  You just can't stick to
the facts, Joop, can you?
 
> The vote for a new Polling Committee and for a committee charged with
> completing the Charter will start tomorrow and will last 4 days.
> Details can be found on the web site under www.idno.org/democinaction.htm
> Mr Thornton has accepted a nomination and will stand in the election for
> Charter committee. 
> 
> The membership stands at 160. Voting is voluntary.

Any bets on turn out?  

Joop, give it up, as amusing as this is, it doesn't help the JTFC for you to keep
getting outed as .... misstating the truth (trying to be nice here).

--
William X. Walsh - DSo Internet Services
Email: william@dso.net  Fax:(209) 671-7934