Re: [ga] Quorum and Definition

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@Alvestrand.no>]

--On 25. juni 2001 08:59 -0400 Sotiris Sotiropoulos 
<sotiris@hermesnetwork.com> wrote:

> I believe it is time that this General Assembly considered a resolution
> on what constitutes a valid quorum requirement for the validity of any
> future voting.  If this is not established, we can talk till the sky
> falls.

The GA in its vote on the voting rule made the following decisions:

- For a "normal" vote, a majority of the cast votes suffice.
- For a change of the rules, a 2/3 majority with a certain minimum
  number of cast votes suffice.

Adopted by a majority of 56 in favour, 5 against.

> The next step is the definition of what a domain name is in fact, not in
> some nebulous or partisan legal haze.  At no other time in History has a
> public resource remained undefined in terms of its estimated ontic
> significance and value for so long (not to mention its economic
> weight).

I believe that there has never been a public resource that has had a value 
assigned to it by decision of a discussion body, where that decision has 
had any significant effect.

The significance of a domain name comes from its use, and the use of other 
domain names. We need to observe, not to assign.


--
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