Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Show me. Show me the gag order that apparently comes with this
> job. The constitution is open to all of us. Chapter and verse, please.
I certainly did not intend to say that there is some kind of legal
requirement that the secratary preserve neutrality.
I merely assert that it's a really good idea.
People have, in fact, asserted that the current secretary allowed his
personal opinions on John Goerzen's measure to influence his
decision. I don't have any idea if that's true; I have no idea what
Darren's opinions even are on the measure, and I certainly trust him
to do his best to keep the separate.
But that's not the problem. In an old phrase, the mere appearance of
a conflict of interest must be avoided. It's not about trust; I
certainly trust everyone involved.
> If we have people so are so susceptible to suggestion that a
> pronouncement by the person perfoming the clerical duties of running
> a vote are likely to change their votes, hell, their opinion is not
> likely to be a great help anyway.
If the secretary were merely a clerical functionary, then I wouldn't
have this issue. But the secretary is also the Official Interpreter
Of The Constitution, and that is something where neutrality is
required.
> And then, the secretary only counts votes and sends out ballots, so
> when there is an opinion in the mail, I cunningly deduce it si Raul
> the developer speaking.
If this were a correct list of the secretary's responsibilities, I'd
agree. But it's not.
> Folks, can we please stop grand standing and get the bloody
> show on the road, please?
Yes. Please. That takes Darren, Raul, and Wichert doing so.
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
