Text 7714, 78 rader
Skriven 2014-12-04 22:29:22 av Kees van Eeten (2:280/5003.4)
   Kommentar till text 7709 av Janis Kracht (1:261/38.0)
Ärende: Your complaint
======================
Hello Janis,

04 Dec 14 13:35, you wrote to me:

 JK> And yet no word from the FTSC Chair that future elections will include
 JK> this. Perhaps he is waiting for a more formal request?

 Would it not be appropriate if the FTSC members are given a chance to discuss
 the way their election process functions. You now expect the Chair to decree
 by himself to outline the procedure for the next election. It does nit fit
 with what you are blaming him for.

 JK> Certainly.  Unfortunately there was no candidate this time that would have
 JK> pushed that envelope of the charset.

 This time that window was closed, as a general accepted characterset was
 chosen for the documents the Chair produced.

 >> The lessen for this year is clearly for the Chairman not be be involved
 >> in the process. That could also have been learned from the previous
 >> election, but was overshadowed by the charset incident.

 JK> And again, we have no word from the FTSC Chair how future situations like
 JK> the time before last involving the charset will be handled,

 That was covered, by not using the ftsc election as a platforn to push
 the use of UTF-8.

 JK> neither do we
 JK> have word from the FTSC Chair how future election coordinators will be
 JK> handled.

 I have no insight in the agenda of the FTSC. The FTSC is a GROUP, the
 Chairman leads the group and is their spokesperson.

 JK> It is now apparent to me after two problemetic elections in a row that
 JK> this should change.  This FTSC chair has always done it all himself. The
 JK> question is what must we do to prevent problems in future FTSC elections
 JK> where the charset is a problem, and how do we get the FTSC Chair to
 JK> appoint an election coordinator that is not himself, and how do we make
 JK> sure that the method of election is clearly stated beforehand and
 JK> followed?

 It always strikes me that nobody really cares what the FTSC does, as long
 as the proposed members are elected.

 But elections, where there are no critical points that could influence the
 outcome, are watched with hawkeyes, for irregularities of no consequence.

 It would be far better to use that energy to watch the members you propose
 on their performance within the FTSC.

 JK> Perhaps we need to revisit FTA-1001.???.  It is difficult on my system
 JK> to
 JK> determine which is the latest one right now, so I'll probably visit
 JK> ftsc.org.

 The documents and their content are a concern of the members of the FTSC.

 Fidonet has not changed from the times of IFNA. We bicker about procedures
 and perceived missteps those who take the initiative make. But no one
 is prepared to lead.

 The importance is that the procedures used in Fidonet are documented and
 proposals are made how to cope with new technical directions, so possible
 developers will choose the same method and their developments are
 compatible with each other.

 Apparently it is more important to elect all proposed candidates of whom
 everybody is happy that they step forward and have their candidacy
 unchallenged, are elected in a flawless procedure.

  Just an annoyed member of Fidonet.

Kees

--- FPD v2.9.040207  GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5
 * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)