ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: Consensus vs Voting (RE: [ga] DNSO General Assembly call to change seating rule)


Ken and all,

  I for one am delighted that Roeland spoke up honestly.  I am sure that
it is a bit embarrassing for you Ken, but than again honesty sometimes
has that effect, doesn't it.  Such comments from you are again demonstrating
why others have ask for your resignation from the NC and also points up
one reason why the DNSO is shall we say less that optimum, to put it
lightly?

Ken Stubbs wrote:

> too bad the orsc civil discourse rules dont apply here.
> roland would be spending time in the "penalty box" .
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
> To: <ga@dnso.org>
> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 7:28 PM
> Subject: RE: Consensus vs Voting (RE: [ga] DNSO General Assembly call to
> change seating rule)
>
> > This message is being resent because there seems to be a disconnect going
> > on. The last I heard, the context was the GA and this is certainly the GA
> > mailing list. I was talking about the GA, or am I moving too fast for
> y'all?
> >
> > The "we" in item 1 is the GA. However, I may have confused some of you
> with
> > my reference to the general NC body. It is opening yet another can of
> worms
> > when we discuss formation and instantiation of the various constituencies.
> > They were created by fiat, by the ICANN BoD. They were captured by the
> > power-clique and I don't consider their NC representitives fairly elected.
> > That is my opinion, one that cannot be changed without proof, that various
> > constituencies are not willing/able to provide. It certainly isn't
> available
> > to any GA member.
> >
> > In addition, it is certainly telling that the constituencies serve on an
> > at-will basis. Ergo, they are 100% at the behest of the ICANN BoD. If they
> > don't do what the BoD asks, or they cause too much upheaval, then the BoD
> > can dissolve that constituency. Hence my statement that the NC is an
> > appointed body.
> >
> > Lacking a constituency for individual domain name owners and small
> > businesses, the GA is forced to assume that role. Yet, it is not allowed
> to
> > select its own NC rep. Jonathan may be a fine individual, but he really
> > should step down in favour of the real GA choice, Jamie Love, whom
> garnered
> > almost twice as many votes.
> >
> > No, the NC is not an elected body, it is appointed, or near enough so as
> to
> > not make much/any difference.
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> >
> > 1) We don't elect NC members, that much is obvious. We tried and we
> failed.
> > The ICANN BoD appointed whomever they want, regardless of the wishes of
> the
> > GA. That record is clear.
> >
> > 2) There is no impeachement mechanism that works. If there is, show it to
> > me.
> >
> > 3) The NC is an appointed body, not an elected one. The ICANN BoD is the
> > sole appointer. GA NC elections are meaningless.
> >
> > Kent, you knew all of the above when you posted. You lie. However, this is
> > the most egregious lie that I have ever seen you make. You are usually not
> > this obvious. Are you feeling well? Or, perhaps you are feeling too well.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Kent Crispin [mailto:kent@songbird.com]
> > > Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 9:20 AM
> > > To: ga@dnso.org
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus vs Voting (RE: [ga] DNSO General
> > > Assembly call to
> > > change seating rule)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 10:51:13PM +0800, YJ Park wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Who is going to paly a check and balance role for NC?
> > >
> > > The checks and balances on the NC are the standard checks and
> > > balances on
> > > *any* elected body -- if you don't like what your representatives do,
> > > you don't re-elect them, or, in the worst case, you impeach them.
> > > That's perfectly normal; there isn't any particular mystery about the
> > > NC in this regard.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
> > > kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>