[governance] coordinator elections

Avri Doria avri at psg.com
Wed Apr 23 14:17:58 EDT 2008


On 23 Apr 2008, at 10:12, Parminder wrote:
>
>
> No intention to make things complicated but I understand your  
> dilemma. But I
> have to conduct elections and also reply to members queries whether  
> we have
> a list of subscribed members.

we have the list of people who voted in the first election on the web  
site and they are 'members' by virtue of having agreed to following  
statement on the ballot (as dictated by the charter).

>>
>> ==== ====
>> POLL TEXT
>> ==== ====
>>
>> By voting you affirm that you consider yourself a Civil Society
>> particpant of the Internet Governance Caucus.
>>
>> If you cannot so affirm, please do not vote.

New subscribers have not had a chance to declare membership because  
there has not been another vote.  but that does not mean they are not  
members, once they are on the list for 2 months, if they think they  
are members, and support the charter, then they are members.

The idea in the charter is that all who are subscribed at a moment 2  
months before the vote are potential members and they declare their  
current membership by voting, as long as the vote includes a statement  
like that above.

>
>
>> Parminder, do you request new members to say if they subscribe to the
>> charter and then given the voting right?
>
> All 'new' members were already asked, and I have a separate list of  
> those
> who have subscribed.

>

is that a chartered activity that is within the coordinator's purview?

>
>> Or do you request all members
>> do so again even they did before?
>
> Nobody has done any process of 'subscribing' to the charter. There  
> was a
> vote on the charter which went 56 - 3, with a quorum of 67  
> (including votes
> rendered invalid for technical reasons). We DONT have a list of  
> those who
> voted 'for' the charter.

true.  but we do have the list of those who voted in the election  
where you were elected.  which is a snapshot f membership at that  
moment in time.

>
>
> Or, Avri, do you suggest that those who
>> subscribed the list for more than two months be given the voting  
>> right,
>> but
>> by voting they must be treated as they have subscribed to the  
>> charter?
>> (To me that seems OK, but I want to confirm).


yes, as long as the vote contains a statement like that above.

>>
>
> That what Avri says.  But I don't understand how does by voting one  
> gets
> treated as having subscribed to the charter. And what of those who  
> do not
> vote because they just do not care to make a choice on co- 
> coordinator issue.
> They become/ remain non-members?

becasue the ballot asks them not to vote if they don't.  seems  
relatively simple and open.

>
>
> This way we still wont have a members list

you will have the list of those who voted.  i.e. active members who  
not only say they believe, but who actually participate in the vote.   
again, just a snapshot, but over time, snapshots, plus lists of people  
who participate in the day to day activity gives a good clue.

>
>
> Whats wrong with sending an email to all asking if they have read and
> subscribe to the charter they cut paste a single line in reply. And  
> on that
> basis prepare a members list, which is then the voting list (with 2  
> month on
> the list criteria added).

it is an extra step we did not agree to in the charter.  beyond that,  
i think it changes the nature of the caucus.  and it is fine for the  
caucus to change its nature if it so wishes, but it should do so by  
changing the charter.

>
>
> Is what you are suggesting that we add a line on the ballot - if you  
> vote,
> it will be taken that you have read the charter and subscribe to  
> it.. A lot
> round about manner of ascertaining the primary criterion of  
> membership per
> the charter but that fine, if everyone wants that. And I cant  
> understand
> what advantage does it have vis a vis a more direct process I  
> suggested.

it is what we did before.

>
>
> And if we go by it still not have a full membership list. And  
> remember even
> last time less people voted in the co-coordinator election than in the
> charter process. People often make that choice. And members have  
> asked for
> that list, which I don't think is an unfair request.


what is a full membership list.  those who beleive but do not vote and  
may have even left the list?  and if i get a real job (not likely)  
with industry tomorrow and am, therefore, no longer qualified for  
membership, am i required to send in my resignation?  or do i just  
search my conscience and not vote next time?

>
>
> Lastly, I am asking this purely from a practical point of view. I  
> need to
> conduct the elections as per the charter. I will go with whatever  
> veers
> towards a consensus position here.

so why choose a two step solution when a 1 step solution will work and  
has precedence?

>>>>
>>>> If this means I can't vote, then it means i can't vote.  Over time,
>>>> especially as a US citizen, I have learned to value the vote very
>>>> little and have no personal objection to being disenfranchised in
>> this
>>>> case.
>>>>
>>>> a.
>>>
>>>
>>> Avri, I request you not to take such an extreme stand. It is a  
>>> simple
>> and
>>> relatively straightforward organizational matter that we are  
>>> trying to
>> sort
>>> out, and I am sure we will collectively be able to do it.
>>>
>>> Parminder

i am not taking an extreme stand.  i am taking a personal stand.  as i  
said i do not really believe that voting is a reasonable method for  
representation - perhaps i am jaded on the topic.  i do believe that  
voting is sometime useful to take a snapshot when there isn't time for  
real consensus or there is a need for secrecy (which is sometimes a  
necessary evil in my opinion).  i do believe in voting with your  
feet.  in fact i believe that it is sometimes the only way a person  
has to be sure her views are heard.

in the case of the IGC i believe it should remain an open caucus where  
we declare our membership by our participation and we do this in a  
manner defined by our charter.  if we are no longer that organization,  
then i have no reason to vote in this organization even though i will  
continue to participate in the list.

a.



____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance



More information about the Governance mailing list