Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Ayreton] Re: PIB BALLOT: Reply to Kev

Expand Messages
  • John Adams
    I hadn t noticed that Merrill was under any form of attack , but your defense of her is most noble. As for her consulting with the KTO or the committee, she d
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 21, 2008
    • 0 Attachment

      I hadn't noticed that Merrill was under any form of 'attack', but your defense of her is most noble. As for her consulting with the KTO or the committee, she'd have to had to have known what the topic or questions were to have anything to ask them about. Sadly, I didn't get a chance to communicate any of that to her. And since it wasn't really TGS business, in reflection this seemed a better place to field the suggestions anyway. Especially given the productive responses we've received.


      I *am* interested in making sure that the process is smooth and regular. That would also include making sure that proxies submitted are acknowledged as received (although I hadn't considered that). A public list of proxy voters would make it easy for those who voted to know that their own votes were received, although personally I have no problem with the Seneschals providing direct acknowledgement (e.g. Henry's 'Got it') to the sender to address this potential problem.


      Also, Wolfram had a potentially useful suggestion:

      ----- Original Message ----
      <Wolfram_von_Waldersbach@...> wrote:

      > Also, how about doing the same (names on ballots)

      > for those who are attending the election? That way,

      > those good folks who are counting the ballots can

      > see whether someone who sent in a proxy ballot

      > isn't also attending the elections and casting an

      > additional vote.

      Another point I hadn't considered. Thanks for the feedback.




      -- Grimkirk


      ----- Original Message ----
      From: kevin purtrell <krpurtell@...>
      To: Ayreton@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 9:52:45 AM
      Subject: Re: [Ayreton] Re: PIB BALLOT: Proxy Ballot for those who cannot attend the PIB voting on April 26

      First, in defence of Merrill, I am not certain this issue can be addressed without
      consulting the Transition Officer, or at least the other Seneschals.
      Second, in defence of Grimkirk, I believe his concern is that somone's proxy vote will
      be lost. Some of the responses to this, I believe, indicte they believe this to be an
      invasion of privacy. I am confident our individual Seneschals will do thier bhest to insure everyone's vote is counted. I believe that when the Cryer announces all the numbers it will
      become evident if somehow someones vote was lost. 
      -Kevin Ambrozijwski

      Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.