Re: [ga] Motion asking for GA poll on rebid of ICANN contract

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Thomas and all assembly members,

Thomas Roessler wrote:

> On 2002-05-02 21:11:34 -0400, Joanna Lane wrote:
>
> >The following table sets out what is believed to be a reasonable
> >guideline as to the timing of the various events that need to
> >take place in order for the whole Assembly to vote on this issue
> >within a 10 day period .
>
> Bzzzt, wrong procedure.  As I said earlier, please get a reasonable
> motion onto the table first.  Then show support.  Then vote.  You're
> still at step 1.

  We already have a motion that is reasonable and has been seconded.
Where is the procedure to which you are indirectly referring to
posted and approved by the AG members Thomas?

>
>
> At this time, there's no need for a poll on the question if the GA
> should vote.

  Well so far 12 ga members do not agree with this assessment, and
4 do agree.

>
>
> Entering broken record mode once again: Propose a motion.  Put it on
> the table for _discussion_ (you know, that thing with listening to
> others, changing the proposal, trying to find consensus,
> respectfully dealing with others' opinions - all that stuff you
> folks claim to have been fighting for in the ICANN process).
> Ideally, that discussion will already show that there is reasonable
> interest in having a vote on the motion which ultimately evolves.
> If needed, one may also ask for a short show of hands in order to
> estimate interest in the motion _after_ it's on the table, i.e.,
> after it has been discussed.  In the end, vote.
>
> James's current attitude - namely, that the only private opinion
> which should matter on this GA is his, and that his motion should be
> put to vote without cumbersome discussions for that reason - is not
> compatible with this process.

  What process?  Where is it defined and approved by the DNSO GA members?

>
>
> James is free to follow the process I have outlined several times
> now.  In that case, we may end up with a vote - the discussion will
> show.
>
> Alternatively, James may continue to operate according to his
> current attitude.  In that case, he won't get a vote any time soon,
> but he'll surely continue to waste his, my, and everyone else's
> time.
>
> To make this crystal clear, these are the options available:
>
>  - follow process
>  - shut up
>  - continue with the present waste of time and ressources
>  - impeach me
>
> Options 1 and 4 are the only ones which may lead to a vote.
>
> Continuing with the present waste of time and ressources is the
> worst of all these options.
>
> Have a nice week-end,
> --
> Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
> --
> 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 for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes 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:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
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