Re: [ga] MOTION - Moving Discussion Off the GA List

["William S. Lovell" <wsl@cerebalaw.com>]

Sotiris:

Excellent response on the very issues now being tackled.  The
Best Practices draft, of which we hope to have got a first part
posted over the weekend on ga-rules, answers your first question
as to what keeps any member from rushing prematurely into the ga,
and also your second question as to how something raises to the
level to be put up on ga.  (Briefly, the process rests on the premise
that when a solution to a problem gets to be refined enough that it
can be intelligently articulated, and there are facts to support it, it can
be made into a formal PROPOSAL, and the membership then has the
opportunity to debate that PROPOSAL and finalize its form before
it rises to the level of a MOTION (which, of course, may also be
debated, amended, etc.))

"The wheels of justice grind exceedingly slow, but they grind exceedingly
fine."  This famous quotation is cute, but not fully applicable here: there
is nothing "exceedingly slow" about the procedure that the Best Practices
will present.

Your final comment -- "I'd like to have both of these points cleared before
I support or reject amotion on these matters" -- could not have been more
timely made: it is precisely the purpose of the Best Practices to ensure that
such questions do indeed get answered before the air is filled with ballots,
amendments, confetti, etc. etc.

Thanks for your most excellent approach to this whole thing!

Bill Lovell

Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> Patrick, Joanna, et al.
>
> Patrick Corliss wrote:
>
> > Hi Joanna
> >
> > The original wording of the motion was:
> >
> > > All debate relating to rules, lists, protocols, procedures, etc. should be
> > > debated on GA-RULES. However, subscribers to GA-RULES may, by
> > > consensus, refer issues to the full GA for a determinative ballot.
> >
> > When you objected to that I amended the wording to read:
> >
> > > All debate relating to rules, lists, protocols, procedures, etc. should be
> > > debated on GA-RULES.  However, subscribers to GA-RULES may refer
> > > issues to the full GA for a determinative ballot or follow such other
> > > prescribed procedures that have been adopted by the General Assembly.
> >
> > You have suggested an alternative form of wording:
> >
> > > All debate relating to rules, lists, protocols, procedures, etc. should be
> > > debated on GA-RULES until such time as an ISSUE has risen to the
> > > level of requiring a determinative ballot of the General Assembly.
> >
> > I cannot see how your wording improves on the amendment.  You agree that
> > there may be a "determinative ballot of the General Assembly" but you have
> > re-introduced a specific *trigger* which the amendment sought to avoid.
>
> I have a question with respect to your wording Patrick, and then one for Joanna.
>
> Patrick, when you say:
>
> >However, subscribers to GA-RULES may refer
> > issues to the full GA for a determinative ballot or follow such other
> > prescribed procedures that have been adopted by the General Assembly.
>
> Does this mean that any subscriber to the ga-rules may refer issues to the full
> GA at any given time?
> I'm sure I'm just being a little obtuse here.. but I'd like this point clarified
> please.
>
> Joanna, with respect to debates that relate to ga-rules, when you state "until
> such time as an ISSUE has risen to the level of requiring a determinative
> ballot", what xactly do you mean by "risen to the level"?  What exactly is the
> standard?  I wonder if you might be able to avoid the term "consensus" in your
> response, and just be a little more specific in characterization than said term
> allows.
>
> I'd like to have both of these points cleared before I support or reject a
> motion on these matters.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>
> --
> 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

--
Any terms or acronyms above that are not familiar
to the reader may possibly be explained at:
"WHAT IS": http://whatis.techtarget.com/
GLOSSARY: http://www.icann.org/general/glossary.htm


--
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