[Steppes] Candidate discussion on the list

[Ronnie Hodges]

Let me first say that I scrambled this off this morning before meetings that 
have had me gone much of the day.  I've taken a second look at it, but 
haven't read anything other than Fritz and Catrin's posts since I came back 
to this.  With that in mind, have a go at these potential ideas:

>Would it be possible to list such letters of intent or scan them on to the 
>website or somesuch?  I will be out of state for the next week and a half 
>and will miss business meeting but would like to see the letters and form 
>my own opinion.

I think it would be a good idea to put the letters of intent into an 
accessible file on the website until a selection is made.

>I would hope that those that have submitted for the position might deign to 
>post to the list a series of....position papers?.....on various issues that 
>they are asked about or that come up that might enlighten those of us that 
>might not be privy to a particular discussion or that are relatively new to 
>SCA and this whole process.  Not necessarily for public discussion, but 
>only to find out views that might lead to intelligent private discussion or 
>enable an informed opinion.

Uhm, I'm thinking aloud some here: please bear with me.  I've run several 
political forums.  In the fairest of these I've done, what first happens is 
people who have questions for the candidates present them in written form, 
which means they've had a chance to think them through enough to articulate 
a fair question that addresses a particular issue.  The written questions 
are given to and asked of each of the candidates by a moderator (ensuring 
anonymity for the questioner, and a level field for the candidates).

What happens next is that people who have clarifying questions may then ask 
them, again, of each of the candidates.  In the most umbiased forums this 
is, again, a question written and presented to the moderator.  The asker 
writes it up while the first part of the forum is happening.  Occasionally, 
a forum allows questions "from the floor": these are unrehearsed, and, 
unfortunately, directed at specific candidates that the questioner favors or 
disfavors.  I see this as a less fair forum method, because bias tends to 
exist in the questions and/or the person/s to whom they are directed.

The advantage to such a forum is that folks who cannot attend may have 
proxied questions presented.

While I agree that people should have access to the positions and views our 
various candidates might have about whatever pops up as issues, I'm not 
particularly in favor of having them post them as position papers to the 
list, but recommend that that kind of questioning process be carried on 
privately.  We'll already have the Q&A that will occur at the September 
meeting, and Baroness Catrin has already explained Their Excellencies' views 
of the posting forum and why.

However, if someone at the September meeting is kind enough to make an 
accurate record of the questions asked the candidates in that public forum 
(oh, and maybe each candidate's responses if it can be done purely 
accurately), I would recommend that those be posted to the list, allowing 
each candidate to make *corrections*, if and as necessary.  Those who have 
questions will have an opportunity for them to be asked in the forum, and 
each of the candidates' positions will be apparent; the field will be sound 
and level for all.  It will also "protect" the candidates from a deluge of 
personal e- and snail-mail that may have the same subjects addressed 
repeatedly.  After all, we don't want to scare any of them off with the 
volume of work this Barony can create for our Hats, yes?

What do you all think?  Thanks for listening to my ramblings.
Ride Well,
Ronnie.

_________________________________________________________________
Get MSN 8 and enjoy automatic e-mail virus protection.    
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus