Re: [alac] revised draft for internal procedures

[Vittorio Bertola <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 12:46:47 +0200, you wrote:

>However, the private voting part requires some more thought -- from
>a practical point of view, staff and liaisons received by ALAC will
>have knowledge of private votes, if these are going to happen on the
>private list, or on committee telephone conferences.  (Which I'd
>greatly prefer over using explicit CC lists -- that only generates
>errors.) The rules should be modified accordingly.

True, staff could get private votes too when technically necessary.

>Also, the challenge process for private votes looks a little
>over-complicated.  I mean, what's the attack model we try to defend
>against here?  The chair mis-counting votes?  In that case, you
>don't need a majority process to fix things.  Either the chair fixes
>things, or the next vote is about replacing him... ;-) 

I'm thinking at less evident cases, such as some votes being
disqualified because the chair thinks they were incorrectly
formulated, or cases where the validity of the appointment of some
members is contested, or any other particular case we might not
conceive now. But if you trust that the result called by the Chair
will always be correct and undoubtable, you can skip most of the
mechanism.
-- 
vb.                  [Vittorio Bertola - vb [at] bertola.eu.org]<---
-------------------> http://bertola.eu.org/ <-----------------------