Re: [council] Convention-Style Voting adapted to the DNSO conditions

[Amadeu Abril i Abril <Amadeu@nominalia.com>]

Nigel Roberts wrote:
> 
> Amadeu:
> 
> No that is not what I am saying:-
> 
> What I am saying is this:
> 
> The voting system now proposed was proposed by (if I understand it)
> ICANN
> staff during the telcon on Thursday afternoon to which I sent my
> apologies. I have not received the minutes of this meeting yet or
> notification where they can be read.

Andrew sent the proposal in wirtten form after discussing this with
Ekusabeth shortly after the telconf, still on Thurdsday.
> 
> The notification that there was a comment period on whatever proposal
> was put forward was only announced  after close of business in Europe
> with a deadline for comment before the opening of business in Europe
> today giving me no opportunity to know this was happening.

False. Dont' you work on Friays? Why have not sent your coments, or
oppositoon then?

(If you are interested, it was a holiday here. But this has not
prevented many of us form keep working out the proposal during the weekend)
> 
> It is not the content of this specific proposal I have a problem with.
> 
Perfect. So might we infer that you agree with it?

> It is this lack of proper procedure, which is exacerbated by the
> fact that we still haven't yet adopted any standing orders other
> than the (IMO) impractical Robert's Rules.

Allow me some irony: despite your tremendous effrots in that direction ;-)

Come on, Nigel. Come aboard. Stop complaining and produce somehting material.
> 
> This is a serious problem which needs to be addressed, otherwise anyone
> may question the legitimacy of any decisions which are made in this
> manner, and none of us want that.
> 
> We (ICANN) were supposed to be a bottom-up organisation, yet we seem to
> be acting all the time as if it is organised from the top-down.
> 
You must be confused. All decisions came form the majority of the NC.
All. the convention-style, the deadlines for coments, its new
extension, its futher extension once again....

I think that Dennis had your proxy. In any case, i would advise that
you revise the above statement and specify whether you think that the
NC can adopt decisins by majority/if you are interested NO ONE oppsoed
the time scale; ask Dennis who was chairing for more details). 

Unless you mean that complete agreement from all presnet members (a
large majority( of the NC is "top.-down" and your individual opinions
are "bottom.up".

In any cae, I won0't reply any further mail form you or any other
person regarindg process. We were talking about the eltoral process.
Full period.

Amadeu, felling insulted by your assumptions that those taking part in
the telconfs and working with fellow members in making proposals are
"imposing" things on those who don't take the time to attend or work
within the agreed timeschedules. Agreed, not imposed by anyone. Except
the NC as a whole