Hi Roy!

Friday April 28 2006, Roy Witt wrote to Vladimir Donskoy:

 VD>>>> Read Policy 8.6 - it is not require quorum! So - all
this elections
 VD>>>> are realized.

 RW>>> 8.6 refers to voting on policy changes, not elections.

 VD>> No, 8.7.2 have link to 8.6 - so quorum is not exist for election ZC.

 RW> Nope. That section applies is in addition to 8.6 and is still addressing
 RW> policy changes. The fact is, there is nothing in policy that applies to
 RW> elections. Basically because there weren't supposed to be any elections
 RW> held by sysops.

Are you read Policy :-) ?

=== Begin Windows Clipboard ===
8.7  Impeachment of a Zone Coordinator

[...skip...]

8.7.2  Procedure as in Policy Referendum

The provisions of sections 8.2 and 8.3 apply to impeachment referenda.

The definition of "majority" in section 8.6 applies.  Only coordinators in
the affected zone vote (even if the zone coordinator is also the Internation-
al Coordinator).
===  End Windows Clipboard  ===

 RW>>> An election as you've described above would be administered under a
 RW>>> region policy. If R50? doesn't have a region policy, there are
 RW>>> plenty of examples in Z1 that can be used as a reference to make
 RW>>> your region policy. Z1's R12, R13 and R18 all have a very good
 RW>>> example and select their RC in this way by votes from every sysop in
 RW>>> the region who wishes to participate in that election.  I have a
 RW>>> copy of each just for the asking.

 VD>> All elections in our region have make to this principle - all sysops
 VD>> voting. We have not "write" Regional Policy, but we
have it "in the
 VD>> head".

 RW> Better to have it in writing so that there's no mis-understandings later.

May be, but now we have not it.

 RW>>>>> In the real world, the votes would be tallied and
the election
 RW>>>>> finished.

 RW>>>>> In Doosche's world, the election would be a failure
because there
 RW>>>>> wasn't a majority turnout.

 VD>>>> Policy require majority votes for start elections and
sample count
 VD>>>> votes on election process result.

 RW>>> Policy says that only RCs can vote for the ZC, but in a democratic
 RW>>> Fidonet, that isn't how it works anymore. In Z1, every sysop is
 RW>>> elegible to vote. However, their RC has the vote per policy, but the
 RW>>> RC's vote is weighted by the majority of their sysops vote.

 VD>> What do you think that FIDO is democratic :-) ? I think that FIDO is
 VD>> "constitution monarchy" (by Policy as Constitution) :-( .

 RW> I don't believe in Fidonet Policy...I don't bother to comply with that
 RW> which I think no longer applies. That's democracy.

With it it would be possible to argue, as when you have entered to FIDO,
you have accepted its Policy (differently you would not have the right on
the node address). However now it and really so out-of-date document that
it is easier to reconsider it than to demand its unconditional performance

[...skip...]

 VD>> For it need as minimum starting of election, that he is not want.

 RW> But elsewhere in these echoes (FN_SYSOP, FIODNEWS), he's stated that he's
 RW> asked the sysops of Z2 if they would like to hold a ZC election and there
 RW> is no reply in the positive.

 RW> Another double standard?

WOW! He wrote previous mail about elections, so he review his position. May
be when start election and we can change Z2C...

Regards, Vladimir Donskoy

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20060326