Добро пожаловать, Гость. Пожалуйста авторизуйтесь здесь.
FGHIGate на GaNJa NeTWoRK ST@Ti0N - Просмотр сообщения в эхоконференции FTSC_PUBLIC
Введите FGHI ссылку:


Присутствуют сообщения из эхоконференции FTSC_PUBLIC с датами от 13 Sep 13 18:57:24 до 15 Nov 24 00:30:01, всего сообщений: 7128
Ответить на сообщение К списку сообщений Предыдущее сообщение Следующее сообщение
= Сообщение: 6347 из 7128 ====================================== FTSC_PUBLIC =
От   : Shaun Buzza                      1:229/110          12 Mar 22 19:08:58
Кому : Ward Dossche                                        12 Mar 22 19:08:58
Тема : Re: 2022 FTSC Standing Member Election - Votes Received
FGHI : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=1:229/110+f2a9943f
На   : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=2:292/854+0513215b
= Кодировка сообщения определена как: ASCII ==================================
Ответ: area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=2:292/854+103c1c5d
==============================================================================
WD> DC> While I won't disagree with your statement (per se) that not all RC's
WD> DC> should be voting, I meant of course that some "regular" sysops may als
WD> DC> have the ability to make an intelligent vote on the subject.
WD>  
WD> While I concur that probably quite a number of sysops even are able to
WD> provide an intelligent vote on the subject, I don't think that should
WD> materialise for the simple reasons that it's not a popularity poll and
WD> this is a technical mandate only...

I disagree. It is not just a 'technical mandate'. If it were, why even
pretend to have an election? Again, I find myself questioning your motives
here.

WD> For the first time in many many FTSC-elections there are competent
WD> candidates, nothing but competent candidates. In the past there have
WD> been nominations for pure political reasons, or to make certain there
WD> was a balance between Z1 and Z2 standing members while that is totally
WD> irrelevant, or simply to upset or annoy an opponent, etc... No political
WD> shit-show this time ...

I cannot speak about past elections, as I was literally not present at the
time. However, this very much seems like a 'political shit-show' to me. It
seems like people may be 'adjusting' the rules of this election in order to
get the results they wish to see.

To be clear, I have not, nor will I ever, suggest that any of these
candidates are incompetent. However, the question has been raised (and
blatantly ignored) about their legitimacy. This is something that bothers me.

Technically, this isn't about politics, it's about technicalities. (o_-)

WD> Plus, a full nodelist-wide election (in my opnion) would make this way
WD> too top-heavy for its intended purpose....

That is very easy to agree with, at least in this specific context.

However, I believe you wouldn't even have your current ZC title without a full
nodelist-wide election, if I've read the Part 4 document correctly.

WD> DC> Does it take a change to P4 for such a change to actually happen?
WD>  
WD> The FTSC itself decides upon that "intra muros". Check 'www.ftsc.org' to
WD> find the procedures ...

WD> DC> (That's a serious question, I'd like to know).
WD>  
WD> Has your quest for knowledge been satisfied or do you need Gandalf's
WD> number?

Shoot, if you got his number, fork it over! I got plenty of Gray magic
questions!

Was Part 4 written in stone? Is it immutable? Should it be updated? Dan
Clough isn't the only one who asks these questions.

(Damn it, Gamgee, stop making me agree with you! (>_<) )

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

К главной странице гейта
Powered by NoSFeRaTU`s FGHIGate
Открытие страницы: 0.049080 секунды