TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! ANSI
echo: ic
to: Michael Grant
from: Dale Shipp
date: 2003-12-23 23:55:00
subject: Re: Proposal

-=> On 12-23-03  00:29,  Michael Grant <=-
 -=> spoke to Mark Lewis about Proposal <=-

 MG> AAMOF, that is my take on the proposal itself; it's much too formal.

   Policy is a formal document.

 MG> It  should be a simpler process, yet one that makes it easier
 MG> than it currently is to hold a policy referendum.

  That is the goal.


 MG> I do not much care for changing the current referendum and 
 MG> subsequent ratification process. The current proposal 
 MG> suggests turning who votes on what upside down from current 
 MG> practice. In the proposal NC's would vote for initiation, 
 MG> but do not get a vote in the referendum. I feel it is 
 MG> important to keep the referendum process as it is; because 
 MG> IMO it is exceedingly fair and democratic as it stands now.


  You are contradicting yourself there.   As it is now, NCs have no role
  at all until the final vote.  The referendum process currently is that
  only the RCs vote, and that is not being changed -- only the quorum
  requirement for calling a referendum is being changed.  By adding the
  possibility that the NCs can play a role in initiation, we are making
  the process more democratic (i.e. closer to the end user sysop) than
  it is now.

  As has been said in the discussion here -- the current process has no
  initiation procedure defined.   The RCs vote to have a referendum on a
  new policy, but in the minds of some have no responsibility to
  participate in the creation of that new policy.  Ergo, no new policy
  would get proposed, nor put to a referendum under that point of view.
  The proposal that has been put forth by the group creates the ability
  to put a new policy amendment on the table for consideration, and
  gives the responsibility for that action to the group of all *Cs.

 MG> The difficulty is in getting enough RC's to _ask_ for a 
 MG> referendum to be initiated in the first place, so IMO only 

   Exactly.

 MG> thing that needs to be changed is for a quorum be
 MG> instituted as a minimum requirement for a number of RC's to 
 MG> /initiate/ a policy referendum.

  Why not let a policy be initiated by a broader group?

                        dale (at) min (dot) net
                              (1:261/1466)



... Shipwrecked on Hesperus in Columbia, Maryland. 23:25:42, 23 Dec 2003
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

--- Maximus/NT 3.01
* Origin: Owl's Anchor (1:261/1466)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 261/1466 123/500 106/2000 633/267

SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com

Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.