Re: [ga-rules] Procedures and Process

["William S. Lovell" <cereba@oregonvos.net>]

Exactly right, William, except for one qualification.  I don't believe
that the Chair needs to see an actual consensus emerging, but only
one or more well defined positions on some specifically defined
issue.  Of the 322 registered voters (up from 304!), there may be
many who have well founded, educated positions just from lurking,
but not posting.  Although not as outspoken as the rest of us, those
voters would then speak through their votes, and the actual election
would then determine whether or not there is a consensus. But I do
agree wholeheartedly with your description of the discussion
process -- points are made, compromises do indeed emerge, etc.,
and all of that is precisely as it should be.

Cheers,

Bill Lovell

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> Hello Joanna,
>
> The GA acts by consensus.  The difficult part of consensus is that you
> cannot make a hard and fast definition of consensus.  It is one of
> those things that you know when you see it.
>
> There is no "next stage" to issues raised in the GA.
>
> Someone raises an issue, and if it gets substantive support, and
> opposition to it is not substantive, or the opposition becomes less
> through compromise in the position, then the chair can declare that
> s/he sees a consensus occuring, and move it to a vote to confirm it.
>
> This is hard for some to accept and deal with, especially those who
> are used to 50%+1 of actively voting participants deciding issues.
>
> That isn't how the GA works.
>
> Sunday, June 24, 2001, 12:27:25 PM, Joanna Lane wrote:
>
> > Hello Dassa,
> > Very good suggestion. Without an agreed procedure, it's very difficult to
> > make any real progress with any proposal that is met with even very limited
> > opposition, unless it already fits with an NC/ BoD agenda, which is not
> > concerned with introducing a process to micro-manage the GA. Catch 22.
>
> > Without wishing to spend a great deal of time on anything other than the
> > substantive issues facing the GA at this time, I do think it's very
> > important for the Assembly to be required by its Rules to give proper
> > consideration to any proposalthat meets certain criteria. Anf then, to deal
> > with it in a specified way.
>
> > The question is, what is the criteria that members can reasonably be
> > expected to meet, in order for their proposals to be taken to the next
> > stage?
>
> > My suggestion would be to include:-
>
> > 1) Endorsement by 10 members (to fit with agreed nomination procedures) of
> > the proposal document. The proposal document to include an Impact Statement,
> > that attempts to answer a few basic questions -
>
> > a) How does this proposal fit with the ByLaws, White and Green papers?
> > b) Is this a proposal to improve to existing operations or to make a
> > structural change to DNSO?
> > c) What are the cost implications?
> > d) What are the possible adverse effects and benefits to the various
> > stakeholder groups?
> > e) Has outreach been undertaken, and if not, how is it proposed to achieve
> > consensus amongst affected stakeholders?
> > f) What is the proposed timeline/ deadline for implementation?
>
> > Thoughts?
>
> > Regards,
> > Joanna
>
> > on 6/24/01 3:36 AM, Dassa at dassa@dhs.org wrote:
>
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> Looking over http://www.dnso.org/dnso/gaindex.html I see there doesn't
> >> appear to be a document outlining the procedures and processes for the
> >> making of motions and for how motions are dealt with in the GA Assembly.
> >>
> >> I would suggest a single document that links all the procedures and
> >> processes of the GA Assembly together for easy reference.
> >>
> >> I suggest it may be helpful for everyone is such a document is developed
> >> and linked into the Administration Documents of the GA.
> >>
> >> Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.
> >>
> >> --
> >> This message was passed to you via the ga-rules@dnso.org list.
> >> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> >> ("unsubscribe ga-rules" in the body of the message).
> >> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >>
>
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga-rules@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga-rules" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
> Userfriendly.com Domains
> The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
> DNS Services from $1.65/mo
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-rules@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-rules" 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-rules@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-rules" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html