[rpd] Policy Proposal: PDP Working Group (WG) Guidelines and Procedures

[Fernando Frediani]

Hello
Your understanding is not quiet correct, because you are assuming all 
are legitimate voters and they should not be. The key thing is to accept 
a clear cut line.
For example if the minimum time period to be registered in the RPD list 
for at least 6 months then anyone with 5 months and a couple of days 
will not be a legitimate voter and that is not a problem, even if the 
person has been contributing to the discussion for that past 5 months. 
If that person remains committed to the process he/she will become a 
voter for the next election.

It's quiet normal to require someone a minimal commitment like this 
example above with a very objective requirement before allowing them to 
take part on decisions, otherwise the process becomes fragile at the 
point to bring unnecessary subjectivity.

Fernando

On 14/09/2020 10:25, Leo Vegoda wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 7:47 PM Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com> wrote:
>> No problem at all.
>> Let's define this them, as in other place by having people who really show commitment to the process and not just pass by once in a life time.
> If you can come up with a clear definition that is rapidly accepted by
> all then you are a genius.
>
>> Even if one or another may not be allowed to vote in a election (which is not a big problem) he/she will be on all other if continues committed to the process.
> I'm not sure I actually understand what you are saying but I think you
> are saying that excluding legitimate voters is acceptable. Is that
> right?