Re: [registrars] Not a problem

[Rick Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

Bob,

since most of your gripes are with my view of reality why don't we discuss
this off-line and off this list.

best,

-rick

On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Robert F. Connelly wrote:

> At 09:12 AM 3/11/03 -0800, Rick Wesson wrote:
>        Not only was the email based Votebot more cumbersome it was
>       up to the excom to tally the vote and could be easily
>       manipulated.
>
>
> Dear Rick:  That is patently false.
>
> [Second transmission, additions in square brackets.]
>
> Dan's system is/was totally done *automatically* for Excom and the full
> PAB membership with no hand work for anyone.  Further, the results were
> there for all to see and verify -- for months or years at a time.  Here
> are the results of a CORE votebot from Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:41:29 -0700
> (PDT):
>
>         http://core.beach.net/votes/0006/
>
> Click on "Finance WG Charter" and you see who voted for what:
>
>         http://core.beach.net/votes/0006/6-0.html
>
> Now, what makes you think the Excom could manipulate that vote?
>
> And since when is $250/month less expensive than $100/ballot?  We don't
> have more than four or five votebots per *year*.
>
> I totally disagree with you, Rick.
>
> [Dan advises that he either offered you the software or actually gave it
> to you -- gratis.  The system was/is very good, much better and user
> friendly than Boardroom's.]
>
> [Further, I heartily object to the Boardroom's practice of permitting any
> participant to sign in and see what *everyone* has voted
> *prior_to_the_close" of the vote.  That is intolerable.]
>
> [Dan's votebot system lets us all see what the votes were -- *after* the
> close of the vote.  Contrary to your ridiculous statement, Excom could
> not "manipulate" the vote.  I was Secretary of PAB and I also ran the
> Votebots under CORE's Excom.  I would never ever think of trying to
> determine what the vote was prior to the closing*.  But the members could
> see who voted for whish side of the issue after the closing.  Had there
> been any "manipulation" by *anyone*, it would be exposed by checking the
> list.]
>
> Sincerely, BobC
>
> [* Footnote:  The one thing I would do was ask Dan how many votes had
> been receive in case there was a need to "tickle" our members and remind
> them to vote.]
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "A man convinced against his will,
>  Is of the same opinion still:-("
>
> Dr. Bray attributed that statement to the Talmud.
>
> I have never verified his attribution.   But it sure describes President
> Chirac.
>
> Perhaps it's a "Frog" disease (with apologies for the affront to our
> friends, the French).
>