[ga] vote appeal

[Eric Dierker <ERIC@HI-TEK.COM>]

Yesterday I posted the following to this list and to Mr.Gaetano,

 http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc07/msg00580.html
I have received no response.
Today I sent a private email requesting some type of response I got
none.

I looked to see if there was an objection or appeal process, there is
not one. There is absolutely no reference to 10 nominations being needed
to run for chair. And I think Mr. Corliss had all 10 of his lined up
when that was announced. hmm.

I then looked at the rules and found this:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2001.GA-chair-election-rules-v0.2.html
SELECTION OF THE ALTERNATE CHAIR

The same process as for chair is used, but the candidate selected for
chair is eliminated before the counting starts.

(NOTE: This is likely to be a different candidate than the runner-up in
the selection procedure for chair, for instance when 90% of the
electorate
rank one person first and another second, while the remaining 10% vote
for a third. Re-running the process is considered more likely to select
a
team that can work well together.)

This shows that there was no need to change any rules, the process
itself would handle JW's withdrawal. And that we are supposed to have a
whole other subsequent election for Alternate Chair

 Then I looked at the watchdog list and found this;
 http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-watchdog/Arc00/

Which shows the committe knew that they would change the outcome of the
election if they changed the rules, allowing for revoting.

This is disgusting.  I can understand why these people do not want me as
alternate, but why did they do so much to get Mr. Corliss?  Could it be
his association with a competitor to ICANN.

The clock is ticking I cannot ignore this!

Sincerely,

--
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