Ross?

 RC> As Zones with total combined sysops, each zone with its own ZC, whose
 RC> "head counts" dont even come close to the head count in
your own zone, the
 RC> numbers game being played is that you as one single zone comprise 90 to
 RC> 95% of the total nodelist. How can the ZC's of those 5 real small zones
 RC> have voting abilities that can potentially overturn the lone vote of your
 RC> ZC who has the most sysops underneath him?

 Many years ago the project of zone7 for russian-speaking part of fido
 was created.

 The advantages of a different zone for Russia were obvious:
 -- more reluctant requirements for zmh keeping due to large geographical area
 -- gathering in one zone nearly all people with similar mentality and
    language, more correct appeal process due to this (no need to translate
    in other language every official letter all the time).
 -- breaking apart that monstrous zone2 at that time.

 But it never went official, cos Ward (as z2c) was against it.

 Well, yes. If we have had this zone7 thing, the 2/3 of fido would be z7. But
 at least we would have our own rep in all these international affairs.

 RC> Well if you read Wards edict, for lack of a better word, he renders the
 RC> ZCC a useless body.

 The usefulness of zcc is really a doubt. Way more correct would be a something
 like global rcc, which would have the authority to overrule zc on
 international level, and maybe a ncc to overrule rc on regional level.

 RC> The way it should be is one zone, one vote.

 It is questionable. I'd say a formula of rcc is more, well, 'democratic' :)


ÿ          o x x
--- -      o o o (ii:cdlxv/ccxxii)