-------------- Original message from Mark Ranft <[log in to unmask]>: -------------- 


> As a general rule, I don't participate in email lists unless it is  important. 

A) 
Well Mark you now know that it is important to some or most on this list of how someone can be elected.

>I have purposely stayed out of the election discussion as I was  unsure of how to express my disinterest in the result. 

A) 
It would have been nice to see that you stay out of it if you had no interest period.

>But now as I look at  the election tallies, I have to wonder what was this published for? 

A)
People like me wanted to know if there were ties or better yet if some votes may have been tossed because the ballots were not cast properly or worse the board did not like someone and in a tie the board makes the decision who stays. 

A) All of which could not have happened now that there is some disclosure of how the votes are counted. I can trust Ron but have doubts of some board members of which I did not personally vote for. 


How important is this to anyone? 

A)
VERY- Trust in the board is everything and I trust very few. See that is why there are a Odd number of board members so that there can be voting on important issues and people have to accept the majority vote.
> 
> I suppose if we were a bunch of high schools students we would now know who  was most popular. But as adults, who cares? 

A)
This is why you should have maybe kept to yourself. People do care and people have made it clear who they voted for. There were an average of 4.4xxx votes per person where there was an option to cast 5 votes. This tells you that a percentage did NOT LIKE all the choices and only voted for 4 of 5 or even less. THIS IS IMPOTRANT.  
My reasone are that I want to know who has a spine to face HP in light of all the secrets and poor timing of announcements like HP's "gift" to extend the contract coverage for HP3000 till 21/31/2008. I would like to have seen a board that would become a broader voice opposed to HP with the decisions coming out and to have HP get off it's A%S and tell us the bottom line of what their true intentions are.

That said, at least you know where I stand.

At this time I want to thank Ron for an outstanding job as usual for keeping the HP3000 public informed with all that is going on HP3000 related. You are the most important voice of the HP3000 to date and have been for several years. 

<<RANfT OFF>>

Joe " TELL IT LIKE IT IS" Dolliver 



> 
> Mark Ranft 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: OpenMPE Support Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ron 
> Seybold 
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:58 PM 
> To: [log in to unmask] 
> Subject: Details on OpenMPE Election Results 
> 
> Hello Friends: 
> 
> OpenMPE has voted to release the candidate-specific details of its 
> 2006 election. The voting put two new directors onto the advocacy 
> group's board of directors, a set of volunteers who do just about all 
> of the work for the four-year-old organization. Three of the four 
> incumbents earned back their seats in the election, which drew a 
> record number of ballots. 
> 
> Six volunteers ran for the five board seats, with the top five 
> vote-getters winning in the election. The results reported by the 
> board, and confirmed in independent observation by The 3000 N ewsWire: 
> 
> 111 people voted 
> 492 total votes were cast 
> 
> Donna Garverick: 101 
> John Wolff: 91 
> Mathew Perdue: 83 
> Bill Lancaster: 82 
> Jennifer Fisher: 69 
> Steve Suraci: 66 
> 
> John Wolff, the vice-chair of the Board of Directors, explained how 
> the voting process works. 
> 
> "When a ballot for OpenMPE Directors is cast on the OpenMPE.org 
> Web site, the ballot data is automatically sent to three e-mail 
> address at once: to the Corporate Secretary, to the Webmaster, and to 
> the independent election observer. At no time do the ballots pass 
> through any one person's hands." 
> 
> "After the polls close, the results are separately counted by the 
> Corporate Secretary as well as the independent election observer. 
> Then they are compared. This year there was complete reconciliation 
> between the two counts. The Webmaster also concurred with the 
> results. The Board then meets and ratifies the results. Winning and 
> losing candidates are then notified of the results by the Corporate 
> Secretary." 
> 
> We have a blog entry for today about the election details with a 
> little extra commentary. Have a look at it at 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Ron Seybold, Editor In Chief 
> The 3000 NewsWire -- 512.331.0075 -- [log in to unmask] 
> Independent Information to Maximize Your HP 3000 
> NewsWire Blog -- http://3000newswire.com/blog 
> Main Web site -- http://www.3000newswire.com 

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *