[GNC] Re: GNC digest, Vol 1 #50 - 4 msgsRe: Looking for consensus on released proxy votes - please read

[Ion Freeman]

Dan,
   Thank you for your email. I believe we have
clarified the central issue -- do we try to predict
what additional free delegates would have done, or do
we act on the actual present delegates. As far as I
know, Arum's argument is the only one for moving
forward with the advantaged-free-delegates option, or
option (A). But we're honoring the votes of
Massachusetts, encouraging delegate attendance, and
making solid decisions more quickly with the
present-delegate-equality option, or option (B).
   Email's a little funny -- a dominant coalition can
just send out a couple of emails, and it can start to
look like there's consensus. I don't know how many
proxy votes there are. If there are ten, and after
they are released a tenth of the delegates are bound
to Mesplay, we're talking about a full Mesplay vote.
This could make the difference between being knocked
out in a round or not.
   So, it's important. You can say option (A) is fair
and balanced, and option (B) is democratic, but I
think the discussion would be a little clearer with
less value-laden labels. I don't think (B) is unfair
or unbalanced, or I wouldn't be advocating for it. Nor
do I think (A) is undemocratic.
   We can think of (B) as just making every
Massachusetts vote a little bigger, as if the
confusing proxy votes did not exist. The incentives
around (A) -- that delegates have more power after
they are released -- are a little confusing to me, and
smell like trouble.
   Can we take a poll?
ion

--- Daniel Melnechuk <isis at isisdesign.com> wrote:
> Ion,
> 
> I think Aram's argument is the strongest point yet
> for what is "fair 
> and balanced" - attempting to implement what would
> be if we had 
> actual delegates and not proxies. Which means that
> the released 
> proxies go to the uncommitted proxy pool and get
> decided by those who 
> are unreleased and uncommitted in proportion to how
> those delegates 
> actually vote.
> 
> And i think it is also the case that we are not
> talking about a large 
> number of proxies.
> 
> Dan
> 
> At 9:45 AM -0500 6/15/2004, Aram Falsafi wrote:
> >
> >I reiterate what I said earlier: When allocating
> proxy votes, we 
> >should try to guess (as much as we can) what would
> have happened had 
> >we been able to afford the transportation cost for
> sending a full 
> >delegation. I would argue that in that case, the
> actual released 
> >delegates would have moved to the uncommitted camp,
> and therefore 
> >any released proxy votes should move there.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GNC mailing list
> GNC at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/gnc
> 



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo