Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Show me. Show me the gag order that apparently comes with this > job. The constitution is open to all of us. Chapter and verse, please.
I certainly did not intend to say that there is some kind of legal requirement that the secratary preserve neutrality. I merely assert that it's a really good idea. People have, in fact, asserted that the current secretary allowed his personal opinions on John Goerzen's measure to influence his decision. I don't have any idea if that's true; I have no idea what Darren's opinions even are on the measure, and I certainly trust him to do his best to keep the separate. But that's not the problem. In an old phrase, the mere appearance of a conflict of interest must be avoided. It's not about trust; I certainly trust everyone involved. > If we have people so are so susceptible to suggestion that a > pronouncement by the person perfoming the clerical duties of running > a vote are likely to change their votes, hell, their opinion is not > likely to be a great help anyway. If the secretary were merely a clerical functionary, then I wouldn't have this issue. But the secretary is also the Official Interpreter Of The Constitution, and that is something where neutrality is required. > And then, the secretary only counts votes and sends out ballots, so > when there is an opinion in the mail, I cunningly deduce it si Raul > the developer speaking. If this were a correct list of the secretary's responsibilities, I'd agree. But it's not. > Folks, can we please stop grand standing and get the bloody > show on the road, please? Yes. Please. That takes Darren, Raul, and Wichert doing so. Thomas
