[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[council] Results from the NCtelecon September 23rd, 1999
[To: council@dnso.org]
[Cc: announce@dnso.org, ga@dnso.org]
[ from http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990923.NCtelecon-minutes.html]
ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Names Council Teleconference on September 23rd, 1999 - results
------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 23, 1999.
Proposed agenda and related documents:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990923.NCtelecon-agenda.html
NC telecon with participation of Andrew McLaughlin
Adopted agenda:
1. Election of Permanent Names Council Members
2. Comments on "Proposed Bylaws Amendments Recommended by ICANN Staff"
3. Procedure of Election of ICANN Board Members
Mathematical algorithm for Election of ICANN Board Members
Postponed items to the next NC telecon on September 30th:
1. Schedule of Meetings In LA (postponed two times, emergency)
2. The DNSO Business Plan and Budget (postponed two times, emergency)
3. Amadeu's motion on DN warehousing (postponed two times)
4. The issue of meeting procedures (postponed)
Next telecon will be held on September 30th, same time.
The Chair will be Dennis Jennings (ccTLD)
The secretariat will provide an agenda
The NC may consider to held the special telecon with all nominees for the
election of ICANN Board members.
List of attendees:
Tony Harris ISPCP
Hirofumi Hotta ISPCP
Michael Schneider ISPCP
Jon Englund Business
Javier Sola Business
Theresa.Swinehart Business
Amadeu Abril i Abril Registrars
Ken Stubbs Registrars
Richard Lindsay Registrars
Don Telage gTLD
Ted Shapiro IP absent
Caroline Chicoine IP
Jonathan Cohen IP
Dennis Jennings ccTLD
Patricio Poblete ccTLD
Nigel Roberts ccTLD absent
Raul Echeberria NCDNH absent
Kathryn Kleiman NCDNH
Youn Jung Park NCDNH
Ben Edelman Berkman Center, webcast
Elisabeth Porteneuve DNSO Secretariat
Chair Dennis Jennings (ccTLD)
Quorum present
* Election of Permanent Names Council Members
Issues:
a. timescale
b. respect of the ICANN Bylaws
c. report from the ICANN side (applications and waivers received)
d. report from Constituencies
Conclusions:
ICANN received four applications and three requests for a waiver. The
request for a waiver from ccTLD will not be accepted, as they do not
have any difficulty to be complient with Bylaws.
The three constituencies that have formally applied for waivers of the
geographic diversity rules will be granted 90-day waivers. Those three
constituencies are the ccTLDs; the registrars; and the IPC.
ICANN shall receive from every Constituency an application for
permanent recognition. Such application shall clairely state the
constituency abide by ICANN Bylaws. Every Constituency should have sent
a formal application, even if it is the same as the original charter.
The three constituencies not compliant with geographic diversity
requirement based on the citizenship shall solve this problem within
90-days and include into their applications the formal statement they
will abide by ICANN Bylaws.
It is not clear when starts the waiver period (before or after the
elections for ICANN Board ?).
* Comments on "Proposed Bylaws Amendments Recommended by ICANN Staff"
a. Article VI, section 4 of ICANN Bylaws.
Comments by Andrew McLaughlin
The proposed amendment is implied by ICANN Bylaws, need to be
explicited. The elected ICANN Board Members serve the community as a
whole. Matter of fairness and conflict of interest. Basis rule of
american corporations - one cannot vote on matters where there is
personnal interest. There is a perception that unless you draw a line,
there is an unfair advantage and the corresponding disadvantage. If the
general feeling is that if a rule gives a significant advantage, then
it is harmfull to the legitimacy. If a Constituency has provisions in
its articles on replacement of NC representatives, then this
Constituency can manage vote.
Long debate.
For one constituency -- gTLD -- if the current representative intend to
run for election, the constituency loose its votes.
Some geographic regions are concerned, that the proposed rule diminish
chances of region to have representatives on the ICANN Board.
Some NC representatives feel that the NC has obligation to the DNSO and
the responsability that whoever is elected to the Board is representing
entity not Constituency. The NC have to listen the concerns outside
about fairness, and how the vote is conduct.
Some feel that no matter the final decision, the rules should not be
changed for this election.
Conclusion.
Any comment on the proposed amendments shall be officialy sent to the
appropriate ICANN mailing list before September 27th, next Board
telecon.
* Procedure of Election of ICANN Board Members
Mathematical algorithm for Election of ICANN Board Members
Issues:
a. timescale
b. two proposal received, from Javier Sola (Convention-Style in
single step) and Dennis Jennings (STV)
c. Andrew Mclaughlin advice on procedure
d. the NC resolved on September 15th to take the final decision today
Andrew Mclaughlin advice on procedure.
Andrew explicited Convention-Style voting and suggested to vote in
rounds.
It was pointed out that the STV request a blind vote, and may bring an
inappropriate agregate (no respect of GD, no respect of different
interests). The STV gives no possibility to adjust after the first and
second elected. The STV is not used in small electorates, but is good
in large ones.
The Convention-Style in rounds has an advantage - gives the possibility
to adjust subsequent votes.
Debate.
The debate included considerations that all regions elect all regions,
which means that minoritarian regions are elected with the support of
majoritarian ones. It was objected that there is no point to have every
region electing only its representation, everybody should think global.
The poll about mecanism was taken: Convention-Style with rounds vs
Convention-Style single step. 7 abstentions (3 NC reps absent from the
telecon, Dennis, Ken, YJP, Jon); 3 votes for single (Javier, Hiro,
Kathryn); 8 votes for rounds (Caroline, Jonathan, Richard, Amadeu,
Michael, Don, Theresa, Patricio).
It was resolved that Andrew and Elisabeth work together just after the
telecon and give proposal. Few hours will be allowed for comments. The
final procedure will be published 48 hours in late on schedule adopted
on September 15th, i.e. no later that Sunday September 26, end of
morning CET time.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information from: © DNSO Names Council