| From: | "Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan" <vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date: | 4 May 2007 03:17:39 -0000 |
| Subject: | Re: RE: [WDDM] Elections |
There is a certain amount of sanctity in the secret vote. It is not merely not allowing others to see whom you vote. It is an _expression_ of your innermost view. Your subsequent actions should not be coloured by the vote you cast for whomsoever it is. Externally it is best that we maintain strict neutrality in our thoughts and actions. Transparency is different. It is a desirable thing in administrative matters. I hope that my views are taken in the right spirit.
PVR
On Thu, 03 May 2007 Nicolas Durand wrote :
>I'm also in favor of the secret vote.
>
>It's the "standard" voting method in most democracies and I think we should
>do the same.
>
>Nico
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
> From: Annette Jackson [aja95799(at)bigpond.net.au]
>Sent: jeudi, 3. mai 2007 10:59
>To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
>Subject: Re: [WDDM] Elections
>
>Mirek,
>the secret vote l believe would be the best,
>Regards Martin Jackson
>
>P.S. Sen. Mike Gravel - Is a fairly amazing person
>
>----- Original Message -----
> From: "WDDM webmaster" <wbm@world-wide-democracy.net>
>To: <wddm@world-wide-democracy.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 3:24 PM
>Subject: [WDDM] Elections
>
>
> > Hi again!
> > Since yesterday, we got 3 more votes/opinions on how to conduct WDDM
> > Board elections: 1 on the site for secret ballot (with option to disclose
> > afterwards), and 2 by e-mail for open vote. So it's now 3 votes for open
> > vote, to 4 for secret vote (3.5 for secret and 3.5 for open if you want).
> > So that's no consensus at all. According to the consensus-based simple
> > initial rules I was advocating two years ago at WDDM relaunch, we should
> > now wait and continue discussion until better consensus is reached.
> > But this charter/board business has been already dragging long enough.
> > So what do you say to the following compromise: Let's use both methods for
>
> > this election. Those who prefer open vote may send in their vote by e-mail
>
> > (as Filia and Jiri more or less have already done), and those who prefer
> > the secret ballot could do it on the voting page on the WDDM site (for
> > this hybrid case I would not scramble voter IDs in the voting database to
> > make sure somebody does not vote both by e-mail and on the site).
> > If you agree with this, no action is needed. You need to reply only if
> > you object a hybrid vote. I'll wait for another day to see if there are
> > any objections.
> >
> > Mirek
> >
>
>