Mosley has been able to get a compromised position from FIA Senate. The first statement at FIA site read like this:
The full membership of the FIA will be invited to attend the meeting at which the widespread publicity following an apparently illegal invasion of the FIA President’s privacy will be discussed.
A naive reader could have concluded that the meeting was to sue NOWT. A week later, the statement from FIA read like this:
The FIA can confirm that the members of the Senate have unanimously approved the proposal of the President of the FIA, that further to the recent press coverage relating to his private life, an Extraordinary General Assembly should be convened.
It also says that:
The General Assembly will include a vote of confidence by secret ballot.
So, it's a different statement: I see it as a compromise. The "private life" part is mentioned, but also the "no confidence". It says "press coverage" instead of "illegal invasion"... that's a huge difference.
Sure Mosley has time to politick around, that's what we paid him for. On the other hand, the "opposing party" might have time to assemble a consensus candidacy. I only hope that the relevant part of the word "candidate" is not "candid".
Anyway, I imagine that the issue will be wrapped in blankets until the name of this candid-ate is found.
Actually, I believe that
the mere fact that the opposition will "incarnate" in someone is a positive fact for those who want Mosley removed. I only hope is someone who is dign of people rooting for him; that is, someone who is a little more in touch with people in F1. On the other hand, it's hard to find someone who is less in touch than Mosley, but you never know...
Another "danger" for the opposition, or so it seems to me, is for them to pick a totally unkown person, who, in a short couple of months, would have an even harder time collecting delegates than Mr. Mosley.
So, maybe the FIA Senate was not as naive when asked for time: I would have asked for more, to be able to assemble a more effective campaign,
raising the issues that evidently can be raised right now, about "power distribution", about a "financially unable FIA", not merely talking about Mr. Mosley "hyperactive pant zipper": that thing, if happening, even being a dish for the press, is the way democracies behave. At stake is nothing less than the future of the FIA: either "more of the same" or what could be qualified as "an unstable epoch". From the point of view of my keyboard, I don't see alternatives:
if ever there was a time when it was opportune to "rebel" against the statu quo is now.
If this is simply an issue about "if the FIA president can embarrass himself", well, let's turn off the lights and let's leave the room...
The "second level" question is "how much power can be taken away from FOMA"? The third level is "can Mr. Ecclestone assemble his own candidate behind the scene, like the last time?", and so on...
It would be much more interesting if FIA had among its ranks a more outspoken, at the same time more "softspoken", less financially dependent person that could bring some change around. I think that's the basis of Craw's candidacy, the only one picked up by the press and the forums I read. I don't know if he thinks that is wise to mix the election with other issues, but it could be: Mosley legitimacy, no matter how you see it, has expired by now, if not some years ago. My bet is that Mr. Ecclestone already had a candidate or two in his mind, even before the scandal. I don't know if I'm seeing too much into it, but
he seems the kind of guy that "doesn't sew even one stitch without a thimble" as we say in spanish.
About Conceptual complain if "we're watching the same thing", well, you know the tale of the blind men and the elephant... in systems science they talk about the "pyramid of information": everybody sees only one side of it.
]