Filia, l am unsure what you are talking about,whether it's the language
translation,the comment about Sen. Mike Gravel was to Mirek,about a recent
e.mail he sent,
Regards Martin
----- Original Message -----
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 10:28
PM
Subject: [WDDM] Re: "Code of condunct"
[WDDM] Elections Hello everyone,
I wish to bring something forward,
triggered by Martin's email below. (I've pasted Mirek's most recent email
below Martin's.)
For the sake of transparency, I think it's good to
clarify oneself right away if one brings something in. These need only be one
or two lines.
Transparency - that of course also being essential in a
(direct) democratic community.
Otherwise one creates a "voice of
power": throw something in and others follow just because you said so. Or:
throw something in as if y o u don't have to deliberate with other
people.
--- I entirely agree with Mark and Mirek on the hybrid
vote proposal, for the same reasons as Mark has explained so
well.
With kind regards, Filia
Op 3-mei-07 om
10:58 heeft Martin Jackson het volgende geschreven:
Mirek, the secret vote l believe would be the
best, Regards Martin Jackson
P.S. Sen. Mike Gravel - Is a fairly
amazing person
Van: /color>wbm@world-wide-democracy.net Onderwerp:
/color>Antw.: [WDDM] Elections Datum: /color>3 mei 2007 5:35:59 GMT+02:00 Aan:
/color>wddm@world-wide-democracy.net Antwoord
aan: /color>wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
All: Sorry for
misinterpreting Filia's e-mail. Below is her further detailed clarification
and Jiri's. I just wanted to make sure that everybody is comfortable with
the process, even if the details of the process may not matter that much (at
this stage) to most people. But consensus and creation of trust may matter,
and are probably helped with taking time to clarify things. But as Mark
agreed, I still think that the hybrid vote proposal is a good one for this
election, because it may accommodate more people.
Filia: thanks for
your support. I really wanted to take a break from WDDM organizing for a
while. I am still willing to continue to take care of the website. As for
the number of Board members, the Charter we approved calls only for 3. But
this can be changed, and so the candidates who ended up on the 4th, 5th, etc.
place can be co-opted later. To accommodate these two suggestions of yours,
I'll but blank fields on the voting form, so that anybody can nominate (and
vote for) additional candidates. Again if I won't receive any objections
against it soon.
More detailed instruction, and the announcement of the
"official" start of the elections will follow
later.
Mirek
-------- Original Message
-------- Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [WDDM] Elections] Date: Wed, 2 May 2007
12:41:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Filia den Hollander
<holla(at)xs4all.nl>
Hi Mirek,
You requested a clarification,
here mine is.
Again (as in his former email), Bruce has put it as it is
for me. I'm not voting for or against a secret ballot. Even if it were a
secret ballot, I would still be able to be entirely open about the votes I
cast.
The point is that so far being a board member is no prestigious
job at all. So if I vote for,say, b a k e r Johnson, then bu t c h e r
Jones and/or his friends would probably not give me dirty looks. (And even
if they did, I would still be able to explain how I've reasoned and came to
a particular decision. So then it's a matter for THEM to ask me
for explanations or not...)
Second, and this is a standpoint
I've explained before on other issues. In an "organization" like this, we
can be happy AT ALL that people want to start any practical activity -
whether it be the creation of a board or start a local campaign (this has
also been a point that Leopoldo Salgui made in Prague, I picked it up from
him). So I simply wish to support initiatives.
The amount of board
members is an issue to me (not too many to guarantee good quality
discussions), as well as who are in it. Mirek and Mark Antell are my
favorites, for they are the ones who in my personal view manage to bring
things forward and who do so in a friendly manner and who have a good deal
of patience. (That's more or less my definition of leadership.) As Mark
Antell is already on the list, I expressed my preference to also include
Mirek.
(And five board members instead of six is okay to me
too.)
If you feel the above should be public, you have my consent
to send this message to public WDDM list. I will not clarify further on
this. If there is any "shortage" I hope Jiri will fill in what is still
unclear.
(To sum up: Most of us are doing a fine job, but
sometimes it's just too hairsplitting to me. I try to keep track on the
broad lines.)
With kind regards, Filia den
Hollander
===========================
-------- Original
Message -------- Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [WDDM] Elections] Date: Wed, 2
May 2007 18:47:39 +0200 From: Jiri Polak
<jiri.polak(at)swipnet.se>
Again, I see things exactly as Filia.
I support whatever decision the chief activists will make. I am focusing on
work in Czech Republic and the newsletter. Sincerely,
Jiri
|