[governance] coordinator elections

[Meryem Marzouki]

Hi,

Le 24 avr. 08 à 17:52, Avri Doria a écrit :

> Well i think it is a discussion between two viewpoints on the  
> notion of the IGC and what membership means in the caucus.
[...]
> Though of course this moment may not be the best moment.  [...]

Agree on both assertions.

It's interesting to note, in any case, that this very important issue  
- who is a member sharing the IGC vision and mission asserted in the  
charter, and who is someone interested in general discussions on this  
mailing list, though not sharing these vision and mission - only  
matters, according to our current charter, when electing coordinators  
and, of course, when the charter has to to be accepted at first time  
or later amended.

No doubt that voting on the charter and its amendments is an act that  
should be restricted to membership. However, it's quite noticeable that:
- we do vote on coordinators, while they actually coordinate *all*  
the mailing list activities where members and non members participate  
with no distinction
- we don't vote on IGC candidates  (e.g. to the MAG), while they are  
supposed to represent IGC - thus, IGC members -views, be accountable  
to it/them, etc. [we use nomcom process instead]
- we don't vote on decisions and statements made on behalf of the  
IGC, and we don't even restrict the consensus seeking process to IGC  
membership [we use consensus among all mailing list subscribers instead]

(and I'm too busy/tired to enter into the appeal process at this step..)

I'm thus looking forward to having a more in depth discussion on all  
this after May consultations.

In order to make my position clear, I voted, with regards to the  
charter:
- Nomination to external bodies, like MAG: in favor of voting  
process, against nomcom process
- Appeal team selection: in favor of voting process, against nomcom  
process
- Voting process: in favor of secret ballot, againt the open ballot  
option with specific secret ballots at coordinators discretion
- Charter approval, not including the above 3 options, which were  
subject to a separate ballot: yes

This was in September 2006.

Best,
Meryem____________________________________________________________
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