-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

          Second Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
                         Open Class (3 vacancies)

Please note that, in this Call for Nominations, all email addresses,
including the application address, are munged with (at) replacing the @,
in accordance with standard practice.

Applications and Nominations are requested for the "Open" class of
membership of the UK Usenet Committee.

There are currently 3 Open Vacancies

   Primary Votetaker: Barry Salter <com2k08-query (at) southie.me.uk>
Secondary Votetaker: Alex Holden <com08nom (at) alexholden.co.uk>
(Please only contact the secondary votetaker in an emergency)

========================================================================

Definition of Open Class of Membership

Any participant in the uk.* hierarchy qualifies as a candidate in the
Open class.

========================================================================

Application Requirements

Any participant in the uk.* hierarchy qualifies as a nominator for the
Open class.

Any individual may nominate a maximum of three candidates.

========================================================================

Nominations must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 23rd September 2008.

========================================================================

Each candidate must receive four nominations. The nominators must
confirm support for their candidate(s) by replying to an email from the
votetaker. Replies must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 30th September
2008.

Please note that the usual voting rules on email address validity also
apply to all application and nomination emails. An application or
nomination cannot be accepted if the votetaker is unable to verify the
identity of the sender.

If a candidate fails to attract four confirmations from their nominators
by that deadline, they will not qualify for this round of elections.

NOTE: All applications will be released to the community by a posting
from a votetaker handling the elections as soon as they are received and
confirmed by similar method once the nominators have confirmed their
nomination.

Please note that there will be not be a period of grace for
confirmations after the deadline of 23:59:59 BST, 30th September 2008.

If candidates wish to supply more than the minimum four nominators, they
may do so. The first four qualifying confirmations received from
nominators will be announced by the votetaker as the official nominators
for each candidate.

In the event of there being more than 3 "Open" Candidates an election
will be held during October 2008.

Nominations *MUST* be sent to xcom2k8a (at) vote.ukvoting.org.uk.

========================================================================

Persons resigning from the Committee

Open Member Class:

Geoff Berrow
Mark Goodge
Alison Hopkins

========================================================================
- - - - - - - - - - Delete this line and everything above it - - - - - - - -
================= Call for Nominations - 2008 Election =================

Sections A and B MUST be completed for your nomination to be considered.
Section C is optional, but recommended.

A. Candidate - Name and Email Address:

Name : [           ]
Email: [           ]

B. Nominators - Name and Email Address

1.  Name : [           ]
1.  Email: [           ]

2.  Name : [           ]
2.  Email: [           ]

3.  Name : [           ]
3.  Email: [           ]

4.  Name : [           ]
4.  Email: [           ]

5. (continue the sequence if required)

C. A short ( < 15 lines ) paragraph on yourself (optional):

================= Call for Nominations - 2008 Election =================
- - - - - - - - - - Delete this line and everything below it - - - - - - - -
========================================================================

These elections are being conducted by neutral third party members of
UKVoting.

UKVoting is a group of independent votetakers who count votes on CFVs in
the uk.* hierarchy.  The rules under which this vote is taken are posted
regularly to uk.net.news.announce or can be found at the following URL:
<http://www.usenet.org.uk/voting.html>

The UKVoting web pages can be found at <http://www.ukvoting.org.uk/>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG-v1.4.6-(GNU/Linux)
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBSMvs/2OfGXkh8vHZAQIDMgP6AxW4Cco1FdOq0FlwdwHWwID16C8VgYT5
/2tF2cSquNCb1d4bu1tb3wyqKVyxszOBV7ZDzwrA5LIEppkJOo6Rxvb0t8v6dngd
HAd6rU2SYGJA5TBRg1BXGa/tTRVqtP91iSp7qdTxLNYniX8E+06jrt9cYEKUWyy3
o2rwWEFdckE=
=QLon
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 17:40:05 +0100, "Barry Salter"
 wrote:

>Nominations must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 23rd September 2008.

Have there been any Barry?

.mother wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 17:40:05 +0100, "Barry Salter"
>  wrote:
> 
>> Nominations must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 23rd September 2008.
> 
> Have there been any Barry?
> 
Whilst I cannot comment on a vote in progress, standard practice is to 
post candidate details as they are received, with a follow-up once 
confirmed, so I shall leave the electorate to draw their own conclusions.

Having said that, from a purely theoretical point of view it would be 
rather interesting to see the Committee's response if there *were* no 
candidates by the close of nominations, as such a scenario is not 
accounted for in the Committee Document.

Cheers,

Barry
Primary Votetaker - UK Usenet Committee Elections 2008

-- 
Barry Salter, bsalter (at) ukvoting (dot) org (dot) uk
PGP Key ID: 0xCFED3BA9, available on <http://subkeys.pgp.net/>

DISCLAIMER: The above is my personal opinion, and does not necessarily
reflect the opinion of UKVoting as a whole.

Barry Salter wrote:
> .mother wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 17:40:05 +0100, "Barry Salter"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Nominations must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 23rd September 2008.
>>
>> Have there been any Barry?
>>
> Whilst I cannot comment on a vote in progress, standard practice is to 
> post candidate details as they are received, with a follow-up once 
> confirmed, so I shall leave the electorate to draw their own conclusions.
> 
> Having said that, from a purely theoretical point of view it would be 
> rather interesting to see the Committee's response if there *were* no 
> candidates by the close of nominations, as such a scenario is not 
> accounted for in the Committee Document.

There would be no election, but there would be three vacancies to be 
filled by co-option.

(That's my opinion, not an official response, but I can't see how it 
could be otherwise).

Mark

On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:37:43 +0100, Barry Salter
 wrote:

>Whilst I cannot comment on a vote in progress, standard practice is to 
>post candidate details as they are received, with a follow-up once 
>confirmed, so I shall leave the electorate to draw their own conclusions.

No problem, just double checking everything was working (given the
early technical issues).

Odd this netnews world.  Last year we had candidates but no VT
organisation, this year (so far) we have VTs and no candidates.

>Having said that, from a purely theoretical point of view it would be 
>rather interesting to see the Committee's response if there *were* no 
>candidates by the close of nominations, as such a scenario is not 
>accounted for in the Committee Document.

I think we'd just accept that we'd need (as Mark said) to look at
co-opting - or not bother and take a larger share of the buscuits.

In  on Thu, 18 Sep 2008
01:37:43 +0100, Barry Salter  wrote:

>.mother wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 17:40:05 +0100, "Barry Salter"
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> Nominations must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 23rd September 2008.
>> 
>> Have there been any Barry?
>> 
>Whilst I cannot comment on a vote in progress, standard practice is to 
>post candidate details as they are received, with a follow-up once 
>confirmed, so I shall leave the electorate to draw their own conclusions.

Well I've already accepted one promise of a bag of biscuits.

(As per earlier wibble on unnc)

-- 
DG

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:37:43  
uk.net.news.management Barry Salter 

>Having said that, from a purely theoretical point of view it would be 
>rather interesting to see the Committee's response if there *were* no 
>candidates by the close of nominations, as such a scenario is not 
>accounted for in the Committee Document.

Ummm, that is what co-opting is in the Committee Document for.

-- 
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days

Wm... wrote:
> Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:37:43  
> uk.net.news.management Barry Salter 
> 
>> Having said that, from a purely theoretical point of view it would be 
>> rather interesting to see the Committee's response if there *were* no 
>> candidates by the close of nominations, as such a scenario is not 
>> accounted for in the Committee Document.
> 
> Ummm, that is what co-opting is in the Committee Document for.
> 
Except the Committee Document says that the Committee SHALL NOT issue an 
"Intention to Co-Opt Notice" from the date the CFN is issued until the 
newly elected members have taken their places as Committee-Elect members.

Taken to the extreme, that could be interpreted to mean that the 
Committee are unable to co-opt anyone until after the 2009 Election at 
the earliest, as the Committee Document doesn't specify any other 
cut-off. ;-)

But then, when the Co-Opting proposal was originally thought up, nobody 
could've foreseen that we'd have no candidates in an Election.

Cheers,

Barry, speaking in a personal capacity, NOT as a member of UKVoting

Barry Salter said:
> Wm... wrote:
>> Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:37:43 
>> uk.net.news.management Barry Salter 
>>
>>> Having said that, from a purely theoretical point of view it would
>>> be rather interesting to see the Committee's response if there
>>> *were* no candidates by the close of nominations, as such a
>>> scenario is not accounted for in the Committee Document.
>>
>> Ummm, that is what co-opting is in the Committee Document for.
>>
> Except the Committee Document says that the Committee SHALL NOT issue
> an "Intention to Co-Opt Notice" from the date the CFN is issued until
> the newly elected members have taken their places as Committee-Elect
> members.
> Taken to the extreme, that could be interpreted to mean that the
> Committee are unable to co-opt anyone until after the 2009 Election at
> the earliest, as the Committee Document doesn't specify any other
> cut-off. ;-)
>
> But then, when the Co-Opting proposal was originally thought up,
> nobody could've foreseen that we'd have no candidates in an Election.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Barry, speaking in a personal capacity, NOT as a member of UKVoting

OTOH, if it doesn't say how many newly elected members have to have taken 
their place(s), so can we consider the number  zero to be included? :-)


-- 
kat
   >^..^<

Fri, 19 Sep 2008 02:32:15  
uk.net.news.management Barry Salter 

>Wm... wrote:
>> Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:37:43  
>>uk.net.news.management Barry Salter 
>>
>>> Having said that, from a purely theoretical point of view it would 
>>>be  rather interesting to see the Committee's response if there 
>>>*were* no  candidates by the close of nominations, as such a scenario 
>>>is not  accounted for in the Committee Document.

>>  Ummm, that is what co-opting is in the Committee Document for.
>>
>Except the Committee Document says that the Committee SHALL NOT issue 
>an "Intention to Co-Opt Notice" from the date the CFN is issued until 
>the newly elected members have taken their places as Committee-Elect 
>members.

I see what you mean now.  Problem is I don't think those words were 
meant to be read in isolation, they are part of a paragraph.
===
A co-opted Open member shall retire from the Committee at the next 
election after their co-option. The Committee SHALL NOT issue an 
"Intention to Co-Opt" notice for the Open class from the date that the 
call for nominations for the election is issued until the newly elected 
members have taken their places as Committee-Elect members.
===

>Taken to the extreme, that could be interpreted to mean that the 
>Committee are unable to co-opt anyone until after the 2009 Election at 
>the earliest, as the Committee Document doesn't specify any other 
>cut-off. ;-)

Will an election be held if there are no candidates?

>But then, when the Co-Opting proposal was originally thought up, nobody 
>could've foreseen that we'd have no candidates in an Election.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Barry, speaking in a personal capacity, NOT as a member of UKVoting

Understood and I know (or at least think) you are teasing to some 
extent, Barry.

I don't think this is a real problem this year as GeoffB has said he'd 
like to stand again and shouldn't have a problem getting nominees.

My reading of the document is that
===
The Committee has the authority to co-opt members if a vacancy exists on 
the Committee (either through retirement or resignation from the 
Committee, Votes of No Confidence in the Committee, positions not filled 
at the annual election, or any other cause).
===
takes precedence over the paragraph quoted above.

In plain words, if there is a hole the komite can co-opt to have it 
filled in; we get a chance to moan about their choice, etc. but I think 
the komite can co-opt even if sufficient valid objections are received 
by Control.

Interesting stuff, eh?  Thanks for raising the issue, Barry.

-- 
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:29:04  
uk.net.news.management . mother <nospam@nominet.name.invalid>

>Odd this netnews world.

you mean this isn't a forum?  I'm going to send my confuser back to 
MicroSoft and quote T&C.  Or something.

>  Last year we had candidates but no VT
>organisation, this year (so far) we have VTs and no candidates.

Not having the VT was confusing, we worked around it; not having 
candidates we have documented for. If, next year, we have no candidates 
and no VT I still think the hierarchy will manage.

Barry:
>>Having said that, from a purely theoretical point of view it would be
>>rather interesting to see the Committee's response if there *were* no
>>candidates by the close of nominations, as such a scenario is not
>>accounted for in the Committee Document.
>
>I think we'd just accept that we'd need (as Mark said) to look at
>co-opting - or not bother and take a larger share of the buscuits.

Minor detail, Martyn, but is your reading of the komite doc that empty 
spots (more biscuits for all) is allowed?

Read this in isolation
===
Membership
There shall be two classes of member of the Committee.

Open Members
An Open Member is any person who is a reader of uk.* articles. There 
shall be 9 Open Members.
===

does that "shall" although not capitalised mean there must be 9 open 
members [1] or is it up to the komite to have empty seats?  I'm not sure 
what it means if it is taken as a stand alone set of words rather than 
as a part of the document.

[1] cue jokes, apols to ladies present

-- 
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days

In  Barry Salter  writes:

>Except the Committee Document says that the Committee SHALL NOT issue an 
>"Intention to Co-Opt Notice" from the date the CFN is issued until the 
>newly elected members have taken their places as Committee-Elect members.

I would assume the ordinary English meaning of that sentence would be

  "until _all_ the newly elected members have taken their places"

which becomes immediately true on the relevent date (Jan 1st IIRC) since
at that point there will exist no newly elected member who has not taken
his (her) place. See elementary axioms of Set Theory :-) .

>Taken to the extreme, that could be interpreted to mean that the 
>Committee are unable to co-opt anyone until after the 2009 Election at 
>the earliest, as the Committee Document doesn't specify any other 
>cut-off. ;-)

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@clerew.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5

Charles Lindsey wrote:
> In  Barry Salter  writes:
> 
>> Except the Committee Document says that the Committee SHALL NOT issue an 
>> "Intention to Co-Opt Notice" from the date the CFN is issued until the 
>> newly elected members have taken their places as Committee-Elect members.
> 
> I would assume the ordinary English meaning of that sentence would be
> 
>   "until _all_ the newly elected members have taken their places"
> 
> which becomes immediately true on the relevent date (Jan 1st IIRC) since
> at that point there will exist no newly elected member who has not taken
> his (her) place. See elementary axioms of Set Theory :-) .

Is the relevant date not five days after the results are posted 
(providing there are no objections) in the normal course of events? Or 
am I losing the plot? (Hence the use of the term "Committee-Elect" as 
opposed to "full Committee members")

Cheers,

Barry

In message , at 00:43:23 on Sat, 20 
Sep 2008, Barry Salter  wibbled
>Charles Lindsey wrote:
>> In  Barry Salter 
>> writes:
>>
>>> Except the Committee Document says that the Committee SHALL NOT 
>>>issue an  "Intention to Co-Opt Notice" from the date the CFN is 
>>>issued until the  newly elected members have taken their places as 
>>>Committee-Elect members.
>>  I would assume the ordinary English meaning of that sentence would 
>>be
>>    "until _all_ the newly elected members have taken their places"
>>  which becomes immediately true on the relevent date (Jan 1st IIRC) 
>>since
>> at that point there will exist no newly elected member who has not taken
>> his (her) place. See elementary axioms of Set Theory :-) .
>
>Is the relevant date not five days after the results are posted 
>(providing there are no objections) in the normal course of events? Or 
>am I losing the plot? (Hence the use of the term "Committee-Elect" as 
>opposed to "full Committee members")
>
I would agree with your date and that you are not losing the plot as the 
Committee Document also says
<quote>
The elected committee members should take their places on the Committee 
from the date of the Results being published as Committee-Elect members. 
 From the 1st January in the year following the election the retiring 
members of the Committee should relinquish their positions and the 
Committee-Elect members should become full Committee members
</quote>

It makes a very clear distinction between Committee-Elect and full 
Committee members so the Co-Opt clause can be used when the results are 
"published" as it also clearly states Committee-Elect. I would agree 
that "published" should not be the date of publication but the later of 
expiry of time for objections or resolution of the last objection (if 
indeed there were objections).

I believe that Charles is wrong here and the Committee can co-opt before 
the 1st January and can do so from when the results are finalised.

-- 
Pedt
uk.announce ~ moderated group to announce news / events of specific interest to
a wider uk.* readership than the group(s) which their subjects would naturally
place them. See charter at <http://www.usenet.org.uk/uk.announce.html>