Re: Open and Transparent Democracy

["Rick H. Wesson" <wessorh@ar.com>]

Hola, 

Through the use of ballots that the constituencys can propose questions
and have them answered by their membership. as I understand it there is
*more* things to figure out for each constituency that there was for the
DNSO bylaws. The site i built is not just for electing individuals it is
for distributed decision support.

If you can outline what issues need to be resolved and propose some
options, i'm sure i can help you write up the abllot for it.

-rick

On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Pisanty Baruch Alejandro-FQ wrote:

[snip]

> I think that the issues at hand in the constituencies process have to be
> solved first in conceptual levels not yet fully approached, even if we can
> be tranquilized by the availability of the voting software you have
> described. 
> 
> In fact the predicament seems to be so hard to solve that the intense
> discussion about it sort of stopped once there was the NSI-Internic issue
> to quarrel about. The Iperdome question of where it belongs seems to
> remain unanswered. No one has yet written "come to my constituency" since
> it seems to belong to so many of them. Will it choose to have only one
> vote? Will we want them voting in many lists since they in fact do
> represent different entities?
> 
> Can we find a "fair play rule" in advance, or do we have to institute a
> Fair Play Supporting Organization?
> 
> Alejandro Pisanty
> 
> 
> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
>      Dr. Alejandro Pisanty, 
>      Director General de Servicios de Computo Academico
>      (Director, Computing Academic Services)
>      Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM)
>      Ciudad Universitaria, 04510 Mexico City DF MEXICO
> 
> Tel. (+52-5) 622-8541, 622-8542; Fax 622-8540
> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
> 
> 
>