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)
