PAB is a volunteer organization, and it shows. I for one don't have the
time or skills to set up HTML balloting.
Recall it was you who resigned from Excom in order to force voting. It is
in view of this, and the forceful voices of other PAB members asking for an
early vote, that I'm trying to get the vote going.
I don't like it, but I can't get an answer back from the list maintainers,
and this could drag on for a long time... Would you prefer that?
If you would like to help in this procedure, perhaps you could put up a
list of nominees on the PAB web site, and gather all the candidates
statements as well and put them up, so that when I send a note to all the
unsubscribed members I can refer them to an informational page.
Antony
At 01:40 PM 12/4/97 -0800, Rick H. Wesson wrote:
>
>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
>> >
>>
>