votes and voting
Tue Feb 27 11:27:43 CST 2001
>With regard to the warrant, I beg to differ that I believe one is provided
>-- it is called personnel. More explicitly, matters of personnel, such as
>appointment of the CAD editor and voting for officers, are things left best
>to the purview of the Executive Committee. The same reason why most every
>organization has a personnel committee -- at universities they address
>issues of tenure, promotion, merit, raises, etc. For the simple reason
>some discussions need a higher measure of confidence so that individuals
>speak with appropriate candor and have the knowledge that those
>comments will be kept within the bounds of that discussion.
This would be a sensible repsonse were the vote tallies to reveal anything
about the voters or their method for choosing but it doesn't.The totals only
speak to the number of particpants and the number that total that seperated
those who were elected and those who weren't.
>Again, the sauce that is good for the goose, I ask where is the warrant?
>The problem with all conspiracy claims is that they can neither be proven
>nor denied. Alas, I suspect this argument cannot have a warrant insofar as
>one that we could test.
True but this is only one of the arguments put forth for disclosure and you
have yet to point out a unique ddisadvantage to posting totals..asssuming
the votes aren't attatched to names.
>The best way to change the organization and its practices (if one is
>dissatisfied) would be to become an agent of change. That could mean
>running for office. That also could mean proposing changes in the bylaws
>constitution, or it could mean volunteering for one of the standing or ad
>hoc committees. There is much work that the organization undertakes in a
>given year and tragically few hands step forward to help carry the load.
I volunteer to work with you Kelly to develop a more acceptable process for
elections. This does not however change the fact that there are a nuymber of
good reasons to disclose the vote total and no unique reasons not to. None
of your answers respond to the argument that disclosure could serve to
galvanize members who have become removed from the process.We agree that
voting is a private and personal matter but that is wholly seperate from a
system of results checking disclosure.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
More information about the Mailman