Guest Editorial

• Announcing Candidacy for Z1C... maybe
• What's Not Happening - Elections

Announcing Candidacy for Z1C... maybe

I'm not sure why I'm doing this... you'd think I'd learn. Last year I announced a candidacy for the Z1EC election, only to find that the election I'd expected never happened. Things are different this year, though. In announcing for the Z1C sysop-level election, I'm not expecting it to be held. In fact, there's been no hint from the Zone 1 RC's, who are empowered by policy to elect a Zone Coordinator, that there are any plans afoot, let alone a sysop-level election. I'm interpreting the silence from the RC's as an indication that Bob Satti will receive a vote of confidence, as happened last year, and this will serve as an election for an additional two-year term.

So why run for an office when I don't expect an open election? Mostly because I believe that there should be one. There are at least two good reasons for this:

1. Fidonet sysops have expressed a consistent desire that representative positions be determined by sysop-level election rather than by the appointments specified in Policy 4. It's become fairly common practice at the NC level and a growing number of RC's are elected... but not the ZC.
2. Bob Satti currently holds the simultaneous positions of Zone Coordinator for Zone 1 and International Coordinator for all of Fidonet. One of these positions is more than enough for one man - it's time to let go.

Whether there is an open election or not, I intend to start acting like a candidate. Currently I plan to discuss two issues which I consider core to the ZC position - the shrinking nodelist and the subject of elections. Following those discussions, I'll try to follow up on whatever feedback comes from echomail and netmail.

One outcome I'd like to see from this announcement is the encouragement of other candidates to announce so we can get a real forum going. Perhaps Bob Satti will even join us. I'd especially like to see the sysops of Fidonet actually conduct an open election themselves rather than waiting for the RC's to make a decision. Such an election would not be binding on the RC's of course, but would effectively communicate to them the expectations of the sysops. Hopefully the RC's would realize that this is a healthy process, and seriously consider it.

What's Not Happening - Elections

WHAT'S NOT HAPPENING

There isn't always something happening on Fidonet, but there's always something which isn't happening. This column is dedicated to the lost causes which make Fido what it isn't today. Published semi-occasionally...

Douglas Myers 1:279/720 doug@mdtnbbs.com

Perennial sport in the Fido echoes is the roasting of non-elected coordinators. Currently, Martin Belcke (Regional Coordinator of Region 11) is the recipient of the honors, but he shares the limelight on a rotating basis with Dallas Hinton (RC17) and Bob Satti (Zone 1 Coordinator and International Coordinator), with occasional guest appearances by other notables.

In all fairness, the criticism doesn't center on Martin's performance as RC. Indications are that he does a good job in that capacity, and probably enjoys widespread support in his own region. The criticism centers on a deep-seated conviction on the part of many that representative positions in Fido should be determined by regularly-scheduled, public elections. Unfortunately, Fido policy doesn't actually require elections - all coordinator positions are appointments by policy. However, it's become customary for a substantial number of these positions to hold public, sysop-level elections with the elected candidate then appointed per policy, and proponents of elections want that practice uniformly applied.

Election advocates make several claims to support their wishes:

1. Elections, if uniformly applied, would revitalize Fidonet.

   This seems highly doubtful to me, as the main reason for Fido's shrinking nodelist seems to be the simple fact that computer enthusiasts have found the Internet more attractive than local BBSes.

2. Elections yield better leaders.

   This is unsupported, and I doubt that it can be demonstrated. However, I believe regularly-scheduled elections encourage some minimum of responsiveness from representatives, or - at least - provide a means for their removal at the next election if unsatisfactory.

3. Elections "validate" a coordinator.

   This seems to be the strongest argument for elections to me. No matter how controversial the election, most folks recognize a voting process as valid.

Martin and his supporters offer several reasons to decline holding an election:

1. Sysops in the region have indicated that they don't want an election - to hold one would act against the wishes of the majority.

   There does seem to be some validity to the claim that sysops in the region are generally satisfied with their present representation, or - at least - aren't in open revolt. Unfortunately, the basis for that claim isn't solid. Surveys have been conducted by both proponents and opponents of elections with, supposedly, conflicting results.
   I suspect that sysops in the region have no desire to elect another candidate, but are not necessarily opposed to holding elections. It's hard for me to see how an actual election would be any more of an imposition than all the surveys.

2. Elections are a messy procedure, leading to vocal conflict and general disharmony.

   If they're done right, this is true. However, what's the alternative? Morphine injections?

3. Elections don't necessarily lead to agreement; those who supported a candidate before still support him, those who didn't still don't, and those who didn't care still don't.

   It's certain that the arguments still go on after an election, often with charges of election irregularities. Still, most folks eventually concede that the fellow who got the most votes should represent.

My prediction is that sysop-level elections for Regions 11 and 17 and for the Z1C position won't happen in the near future... but they should. Not because Fido will somehow be revitalized with elections, not because the unelected coordinators have done a poor job, but simply because Fido should be in the hands of the sysops who are members.