Re: Re: [ga] The everlasting PIN situation

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto.gaetano@voila.fr>]

Patrik wrote:
>
>I am not surprised if one look back to the history of _how_ the 
>"unverified" members were allocated.
>
>I think 20% is a result which is much higher than what I expected.
>

Yes, and anyway the total amount of already verified members is far 
higher than the 5000 that was chosen as lower limit for valid elections.


But the question was what to do if "good" members are not allowed to 
participate in this phase, not for their fault, but because of the 
delays in verification.

If your answer is:
"No problem, the 75% to 80% missing are *fake*, *unverifiable*, 
*unqualified*, or whatever"
I can (and happily will) live with that (provided that the 2% is 
calculated on the "verified today" number of Members).
If we find out, OTOH, that only 36231 will be allowed to participate in 
this phase, but 158593 (or anyway substantially more than 36231) will be
 allowed to participate in October, something is wrong.

Regards
Roberto
--
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