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

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>]

At first glance, I don't think that this would be a bad idea, but I think
the GA would have to be more clearly formulated before this would work.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Davis [mailto:bob.davis@netzero.net]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 9:48 PM
To: ga@dnso.org
Cc: Gomes, Chuck; 'Roeland Meyer'; 'Kent Crispin'
Subject: Re: Consensus vs Voting (RE: [ga] DNSO General Assembly call to
c hange seating rule)


Mr. Gomes and everyone,

  I believe that the point that Mr. Meyer was attempting to make
is that the GA should also have at least one representative on the
NC as well.  If so, we support this position.  I also believe
that Mr. Meyer may have been suggesting that ALL NC
representatives should fall under the GA's final approval
in some manner.  If so, we also support this view or position
as well.

Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> Roeland,
>
> As Kent already pointed out, NC members are elected by the constituencies.
> They are definitely not appointed by the board.
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roeland Meyer [mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 12:53 PM
> To: 'Kent Crispin'; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: Consensus vs Voting (RE: [ga] DNSO General Assembly call to
> c hange seating rule)
>
> 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


_____NetZero Free Internet Access and Email______
   http://www.netzero.net/download/index.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