Re: [council] e-mail votes v3

[Elisabeth Porteneuve <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

> 
> Having witnessed the recent to do in the U.S. Congress over federal 
> reform, I have a concern with the following provision:
> 
> >  
> >
> > Proposed new section 13. E-mail voting v3
> > DNSO
> > 13.1 The DNSO secretariat will typically act as returning officer for 
> > an e-mail vote. All votes using the DNSO secretariat voting software 
> > have resource implications. Any vote of the NC or General Assembly 
> > (GA) undertaken by the DNSO secretariat must be requested by the Names 
> > Council chair. The NC chair will not ordinarily refuse a request for a 
> > vote from the chair of the GA for a GA vote, so long as there is no 
> > cost implication from overtime or other costs above that expected in 
> > the annual DNSO secretariat budget.  
> >
> I would like to propose that there be somemeansby which a super-majority 
> of the NC (2/3?, 3/4?) may compell a vote.  This prevents too much power 
> from residing with the chair.
> 
> Harold Feld
> NCDNHC
> 

Harold,

The underlaying in the above provision is to have means to
control expenses. We might be facing various frequent requests 
arriving from the GA Chair for votes (it did happen in the past)
and we need someone to look on expenditures vs income, and
working closely with Secretariat staff, knowing what is possible
and what is not.

Elisabeth Porteneuve