RE: [registrars] Not a problem

["Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>]

Hello All,

I support the current software solution that we have in place.  It provides a good view of votes in progress, previous votes, and provides a good record for the constituency.

We may want to consider further refining the processes associated with the software solution.  However bear in mind that we are still operating entirely with volunteers, and we need to consider the load extra processes place on those volunteers versus any gains.

For example the GNSO council uses voting software, but also has a paid Secretariat function that is available to support votes cast by phone and other means if there is a problem with a council member accessing the email voting software.  There are also only 18 members of the GNSO Council.  The key thing to note here is that there is a paid administration function, and the council is smaller.

So whilst in theory it is great to be flexible, bear in mind that Rick Wesson has devoted many hours already as a volunteer to run these votes.  Those that want to do better, could volunteer to help.

Regards,
Bruce


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Wesson [mailto:wessorh@ar.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 4:13 AM
> To: Robert F. Connelly
> Cc: Registrar Constituency
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Not a problem
> 
> 
> 
> bob,
> 
> 
> > BTW, we never had these problems with Dan Busarow's 
> "Votebot".  I ran it
> > first in PAB back in 1997.  Rick has selected a different 
> system supposedly
> > because it was less expensive or free.  Dan never did 
> charge PAB for his
> > Votebot.
> 
> The current "Votebot" was proposed by Kenn Stubbs and selected by 100%
> consensus vote of the executive committee. It costs $250 a 
> month while Mr.
> Busarow charged us $100 per ballot. Not only was the email 
> based Votebot
> more cumbersome it was up to the excom to tally the vote and could be
> easily manipulated. The current system tracks all changes, it 
> run by an
> independent 3rd party and will cost us less.
> 
> 
> 
> -rick
> 
> 
>