Re: PAB 90% of participation is showing up

Rick H. Wesson (wessorh@ar.com)
Thu, 4 Dec 1997 13:40:02 -0800 (PST)


Umm,

several weeks ago i was slammed for suggesting that we take votes
for juging consensous. now we see these little ballots coming up all over
the place and posted on this list to "test the waters" on some consept.

*PLEASE* if you are gona tackle things like this,
1. use some www html forms.
it will take you longer to do, and hence might be done better.
it would keep the clutter down on the list.
i don't real care how pab menber X voted, i only care about
the summaries.

2. request that folks post to you, their answers so
general lists readers don't have to see them.

i find it severaly irritating to see folks doing what three
weeks ago they said was such a bad idea.

regards,

-rick

On Thu, 4 Dec 1997, Antony Van Couvering wrote:

> Dear PAB,
>
> OK, what shall we do. I'm willing to take a quick and dirty consensus on
> how we proceed.
>
> [ ] We wait until we have a method for PAB members to resubscribe
>
> [ ] We proceed with elections as is. We inform PAB members who are not on
> the list that an election is happening, and provide them with a way of
> voting without being on the list.
>
> I'm assuming that Dan/Rick Wesson can arrange for voting for people who are
> not on the list.
>
> Please respond asap so that we can move off this dime.
>
> Antony
>
>
> At 12:17 PM 12/4/97 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:
> >On Thu, Dec 04, 1997 at 12:11:50PM -0500, Antony Van Couvering wrote:
> >> Steve,
> >>
> >> Your point is well taken, and one we discussed earlier on the list. I
> >> don't really care, but I don't want to hear later that the Excom was voted
> >> in without a mandate. You see the problem.
> >>
> >> I would be interested in hearing more from other PAB members. Anything to
> >> get this election going ASAP.
> >>
> >> Antony
> >
> >Since I am standing in this election, perhaps my opinion should be
> >discounted.
> >
> >But I tend to agree with Steve. We have a responsibility
> >to try to keep the names on the mailing list up to date -- that is a
> >real issue. And we have a collective responsibility to keep this list
> >focused and pertinent, so that people are not inundated with weather
> >reports, flames, cute comments, and so on.
> >
> >OTOH we obviously cannot be responsible for the mail reading habits of
> >participants. If we take as a given that this list is the forum
> >through which PAB will conduct its elections and otherwise make
> >decisions, then I think we can take as a given that voluntary
> >non-participation is not our problem.
> >
> >Also, the problems with the maintenance of the mailing list are hard
> >to evaluate -- it would be good if someone like Rick or Bob Shaw or
> >Dave Crocker (someone who has actually dealt with it, in other words)
> >to quantify the problem, if possible.
> >
> >--
> >Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited",
> >kent@songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke...
> >PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
> >http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html
> >
>