At 08:36 PM 10/21/2003 -0400, you wrote: >I know how hard the EC works, I've been there, but, I also would like the >whole project to hold the EC in the highest regard, to feel that they are >fair and impartial, so I truly believe another way of selection, rather than >the EC itself, would be the best. I have not seen or heard any suggestions put forth that would work better than the current process. I am willing to bet that there would be some really serious yelling and screaming if the AB was to pick and choose in order to select the EC. Currently the EC suggests by submitting a slate. If it is not approved by the AB, they are required to figure out why the slate was not approved and offer a modified slate in the hopes that it will meet the ABs approval. This prevents anyone from rigging anything does it not? Les S Les Shockey email address = lshockey@citynet.net or wvgenweb@citynet.net RootsWeb Listowner for the SHOCKEY family discussion group. SHOCKEY-L@rootsweb.com Visit the Jackson County, WVGenWeb Page, part of USGenWeb Project at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~wvjackso/JACK.HTM Visit the (West Virginia) WVGenWeb: http://www.rootsweb.com/~wvgenweb/

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 23:57:29 -0400, Lesley Shockey wrote > > I have not seen or heard any suggestions put forth that would work > better than the current process. I am willing to bet that there > would be some really serious yelling and screaming if the AB was to > pick and choose in order to select the EC. > I agree. And to be honest, I can think of some serious "conflict of interest" issues involved. Does it really seem appropriate for people with such a direct interest in the outcome of an election to be hand-picking the people who would run the election? No matter how honest the people involved, it doesn't look right. In my neck of the woods, people that run in elections don't also run the elections -- for that matter, election office employees aren't vetted or approved by elected officials. The election office is an independent and autonomous body, and the EC should operate the same way. > > Currently the EC suggests by submitting a slate. If it is not > approved by the AB, they are required to figure out why the slate > was not approved and offer a modified slate in the hopes that it > will meet the ABs approval. This prevents anyone from rigging > anything does it not? > Not only is the EC approved by the AB, but an AB member (chosen by the Board) and the NC (elected by the members) sit as ex officio members of the EC. Is the AB saying that we can't trust these people to object if there are some sort of shenanigans going on? If that's the case, why would it be any more trustworthy for the AB to pick-and-choose members individually? And if that's the case, why have elections? After all, apparently no one within the USGW Project is actually trustworthy, so we can't run elections. Of course, since we can't trust anyone, we wouldn't want to have an election because there would be no one to vote into office. OK, that's a little melodramatic, but still... Angie