USGENWEB-SW-L Archives

Archiver > USGENWEB-SW > 2005-06 > 1119287028


From: Don Tharp <>
Subject: Re: [USGenWeb-SW] Question for the candidates
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 12:03:48 -0500
References: <20050617194144.NVXF13442.lakermmtao05.cox.net@DON><42B62808.E2703164@earthlink.net><20050620151512.PTYX28600.lakermmtao11.cox.net@DON>
In-Reply-To: <006601c575b1$666f5280$6401a8c0@home2>


Absolutely, "we" are the USGenWeb Project. The SP members are just as much
a part of this project as any other person or group.

The leaders of the SP groups have always stated they are a part of the
USGenWeb Project.

So, if it is good for me, it is good for them, if it is good for them then
it is good for me and given that, it is good for the Project.

DonT

At 12:02 PM 6/20/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>Counter question since I am looking for candidates to vote for........<g>
>
>SO if the system of one vote were to be adopted, which I think is a good
>idea, but like I said, time and planning would need to be done, anyway, what
>about that Special Projects rep??? Would this system that we are talking
>about also eliminate the SP reps? And they would be on the same level
>field??
>
>Paulette
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Don Tharp" <>
>To: <>
>Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 11:15 AM
>Subject: Re: [USGenWeb-SW] Question for the candidates
>
>
>> At 10:46 PM 6/19/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>>Now to the current subject of one member one vote, I see no possible way
>>>to
>>>have a level playing field as some refer to it without having some
>>>structure.
>>>
>>>The only way one member one vote even could be implemented would be to
>>>divide the number of members up by the number of reps. say ten for sake of
>>>argument, leaving each rep to represent 250 members for example.
>>
>> Much easier than that Don. In fact you just did it. Just decide how many
>> representatives are needed to assure an adequate representation of the
>> views and opinions of the Project's members. If that is 10, fine, if 16
>> are
>> needed that, too, would be fine. What ever is needed divide that number of
>> reps into the total number of members and you will have the _average_
>> number of members each representative would represent.
>>
>> Why you believe one would need that information is not clear to me. All
>> representatives would be making decisions based on the good of the Project
>> and would therefore be representing each and every one of us.
>>
>> You've been on the board for a couple of years now. Isn't that what you
>> do?
>> Make decisions based on what is good for the project, Perhaps you felt it
>> your duty to make decisions that favored one region or group of members
>> that elected you at the expense of another region or at the expense of
>> another group?
>>
>> Whatever number is arrived at, the AB will not be representing any number
>> of members, they will be in place to represent _all_ members. To listen to
>> and make decisions based on the good of the project as they should be
>> doing
>> now.
>>
>>>
>>>Having taken that painful step, the next becomes excruciatingly complex.
>>>How
>>>does one pick the 250 people they will represent? It can't be by any kind
>>>of
>>>geographical boundary; it would have to erase all boundaries.
>>
>> Let me erase some of your pain. For the sake of argument let's set 16 as
>> the necessary number of representatives. Large enough number that it would
>> provide representatives sharing the views, bias and prejudice of the
>> membership. Large enough to override collusion among a few if that were to
>> happen. Small enough to be efficient.
>>
>> Since that pain is erased lets reduce the excruciating complexity of the
>> idea. Each representative will represent all members of the Project, be
>> that 2230, 1000, 3000.

>> There will be no special interest representatives.
>>>
>>>Excruciating might be understating the problem........it just has no
>>>solution.....too much to keep track of. Administrative wise, it seems like
>>>a
>>>gone gosling.
>>
>> The EC now must comply and maintain data for nine different positions,
>> three different groups and four different regions and assure voter
>> qualification for members to vote for those positions. That is
>> excruciating.
>>
>> If all representatives are representing all members the EC only has to
>> generate a list of members eligible to vote.
>>
>>>
>>>Thanks all........I will answer further questions if you have them.
>>
>> DonK, what is amazing to me is the fact you are a candidate for a
>> position,
>> NC, the winner of which will be chosen by the very system you say is
>> unworkable, That is
>> one member one vote.
>>
>> More than 20% of the AB is chosen each year by that simple principle, yet
>> you say it can't be done. Amazing.
>>
>> How do you expect to lead this organization if you can't grasp that simple
>> idea?
>> Evidently you prefer a system where a rep can be satisfied to vote for the
>> interests of special groups or regions and not be bothered to take into
>> consideration the well being of the project as a whole.
>>
>> DonT
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==== USGENWEB-SW Mailing List ====
>> The Advisory Board: http://www.usgenweb.com/about/advisoryboard.shtml
>>
>
>
>==== USGENWEB-SW Mailing List ====
>The Advisory Board: http://www.usgenweb.com/about/advisoryboard.shtml
>


This thread: