Re: [wg-c] Vote for Working Group Co-chair

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

On 28 July 1999, Jonathan Weinberg <weinberg@mail.msen.com> wrote:


>	Let's all try to lower the tensions here.  Yes, it would have
>been bett er to have a voter list.  But I see no reason to believe
>that anything improper has happened.  Keith didn't vote for me, but
>he's been following these issues for a long time, and he's a
>perfectly appropriate person to be a member of the WG.  As far as I'm
>concerned, his vote is perfectly valid.

Jon, if there weren't so much water already raging under this bridge, if
this race weren't so close, and if the underlying motivations here weren't
so suspect, I'd agree with you.

However, in situations where the above is true, it's ususally best to
choose a set of procedures, and follow them to the letter.  That way, 
finger-pointing and cries of foul play are substantially reduced.

This group is far too contentious, both on the issues and
personality-wise, to make ad hoc decisions like this.  I didn't say
the choice of the list on the website was fair to those who may have
subscribed after the list was updated but before the vote commenced.
I just mentioned that in the absence of any other method of validation,
it's the fairest method I see.

Unfortunately, if we agree to let you vouch for someone, why then can't
others begin to vouch for yet more people who may vote at the last
minute?

It's in everyone's best interest that this vote comes off as scandal-free
as possible.

-- 
Mark C. Langston	     			Let your voice be heard:
mark@bitshift.org				     http://www.idno.org
Systems Admin					    http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA					     http://www.dnso.org