I'm quiet, but do follow this.
We either need to legitimize the election, or do it over. And we need
to do it now. Staying in limbo like this is counterproductive and
undermines credibility.
We're not a club, meeting in a tree house; we're a group of
professionals trying to be recognized as a standards organization.
We need to set rules and abide by them, lest we be recognized in ways we
won't enjoy.
Our election rules don't work.
We don't therefore ignore them, we therefore fix them.
Vote counters could be given a fixed period in which to respond -- and
then, given a quorum of vote counters, the election could be declared
legitimate. If there is no quorum of vote counters, then the election
is not legitimate and must be done over.
Kim
P.S. This is potentially unfair to the currently elected, but I doubt
the results will change.
I for one will vote for the currently elected, as I consider the
election legit and don't want the results to change.
Presumably most voters will vote the same way they did before.
On 11/12/2010 8:36 AM, Steve Simmons wrote:
On Nov 11, 2010, at 11:09 PM, Derrick Brashear wrote:
Have we declared the election done yet? I understand the desire to do
it 'right' the first time, but there comes a point at which we need to
move on, and while I don't know when it was, it was.
If the tentative chairs have no objection, let's have them move ahead on any
chair-ish business as if the vote had succeeded. The only downsides I see are
that nothing they do is official until the vote is formalized, and that there
is the small chance the third counter will come up with some different election
result.
If David doesn't surface after appropriate nagging, we could punt the issue to
the IETF higher-ups for guidance.
We could ask the voters to re-send their votes to a different vote counter. I'd
be happy to receive them. With Thomas Kula right down the hall, it would be
fast and easy to keep on top of the incoming votes and nag those voters who
hadn't re-sent. This assumes, of course, that it doesn't cause the IETF
higher-ups to have a conniption.
Should a full re-vote be required, I'd be happy to serve as third counter and
would withdraw as candidate. Somehow I doubt the result would be changing in my
favor. :-)
Steve
_______________________________________________
AFS3-standardization mailing list
[email protected]
http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
_______________________________________________
AFS3-standardization mailing list
[email protected]
http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
