RE: [wg-review] Let's Solve the Voting Matter

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

> From: Derek Conant - DNSGA [mailto:dconant@dnsga.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 9:02 PM

> If we accomplish anything here with this WG, let's solve the voting
> matter.

We already have an agenda, let's stick to it.

> This WG looks ridiculous submitting its current process that it relies
> upon for its direction.  What kind of an example to others is this
> voting process the WG uses to determine its direction?

This is a dsitraction, the polling mechanism we have agreed to, works fine
the way it is, for the size of audience that we have.

> The voting matter is on the table.  Let's spend a few minutes here and
> fix it.  Then, let's move forward and advance the WG.

It is NOT on the table until the chair says it is.

> For stronger organization, I propose the following 7 quick 
> steps to fix
> the voting matter.
> 
> 1.  Scrap the current WG voting process completely.

and your reasons, beyond disrupting this process, are  ...?

> 2.  Only those who participate in submitting comments to this WG may
> vote.

heh. It is obvious what is wrong with this.

> 3.  The WG gives 24 hour notice before closing the vote process on any
> subject matter.

This is being done with the current system.

> 4.  WG participants who vote are identified and counted.

... and you are an American? That will certainly have a chilling effect.

> 5.  If WG participants do not want to be identified by their 
> votes, then they should not vote.

Was it Hamilton that insisted that only land-owners could have a vote?

> 6.  The majority vote wins.
> 
> 7.  A tie vote brings the WG participants back to the debate table.

nieve!
ROTFL!
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html