[ga] RE: Recall of GA Chair

["Peter de Blanc" <pdeblanc@usvi.net>]

Joanna and Philip:

In the interests of eliminating what I consider to be time-wasting
discussion about procedures, If Philip wishes to withdraw the agenda
item from the published list, then I will bring it up under AOB at the
next NC meeting myself.

That way, we can move on, and hopefully use this list for more
substantive work.

As I said in a previous post, my inclination, as a NC member, would be
to return the request to the GA based on lack of consensus on the
"motion". In fact, it is not even a motion. So far I have seen only one
or two "partial agreements" to WXW suggestion.

If the GA wishes a new chair, it can decide that on its own. And to me,
that means at least 51% of the persons who have posted to the GA list in
the last 3 months would need to express such a desire.

Peter de Blanc

-----Original Message-----
From: Joanna Lane [mailto:jo-uk@rcn.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 5:44 AM
To: Joanna Lane; Peter de Blanc; 'Jeff Williams'; 'Joop Teernstra'; Paul
M. Kane; Philip Shepard
Cc: ga@dnso.org; agenda@dnso.org
Subject: Re: Recall of GA Chair


Philip,

Where is the Timeline for the current meeting Agenda, the deadline for
IC input, the deadline to post to the NC and the deadline for papers?
All of these should have been posted with the draft agenda prior to
announcement being made to the NC and GA, shouldn't they?

According to the agreed rules, "The Intake Committee shall have the sole
discretion to deviate from these procedures when externalities dictate."
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00026.html

When exactly did the Intake Committee agree to your deviation from
procedures? Exactly what are the externalities that dictated the
decision to add to the agenda so late and without any discussion with
any member of the IC? I would have thought externalities would dictate
item 8 as "Election of new Intake Committee Chair".

Also in the rules, "Last minute. In case of issues arising subsequent to
the above timetable, NC members will be able to propose items for any
other business at the start of an NC meeting. Such items will be
accepted for discussion that day or deferred to the IC at the discretion
of the NC chair. "
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00048.html

Did you consider discussing William Walsh's comment in AOB, or deferring
it to the IC for discussion at all?

It is evident that you have vigorously enforced intake committee
procedures in the past. For example, you wrote:-

1) "Please let me have your agreement today Monday
September 25 as the period of notice for the next meeting expires
Wednesday 28 September !"
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00068.html


2) "In order to give sufficient notice to NC members and to allow time
for consultation within constituencies items must be submitted 21 days
before the date of the meeting. This time limit has passed for the 19
October meeting.  We welcome your input now and up to 24 October 2000
for the Names Council meeting of 14 November 2000."
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00075.html

3)   
 "Timeline
        o Agenda input closes 3 January 2001
        o IC submits draft agenda to chair latest 9 January
        o Chair amends/approves and Secretary posts to NC latest 10
January
        o Agenda item documents sent to NC latest 17 January"
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00180.html


4) "Note we are late with the timetable and should post to the NC today.
So, please comments on the agenda by Paris time 16.00 Feb 13. Philip "
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00206.html


5) "I am travelling a lot next week and will miss the 25 April deadline
for posting the agenda to the NC. So please post this agenda below. The
Intake Committee may still have changes and I can take them when I
return." http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00238.html

With so many pressing issues to address in numerous Task Forces on which
you sit, not to mention the additional burden of the Board's directive
to focus on security issues, could a few things be falling through the
net because you are spreading yourself too thin?

Regards,
Joanna Lane






From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be>
Organization: AIM
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 09:37:25 +0200
To: "Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>
Cc: <ga@dnso.org>, "NC \(list\)" <council@dnso.org>
Subject: NC agenda and Recall of GA Chair

Joanna,

I would not read too much into the appearance of agenda item 8 about the
recall of the GA chair. I do not expect a vote to be taken on this item.
All that has happened is that a member of the GA felt strongly enough to
request a recall and it seemed inappropriate to ignore this."

"And please do not get too entangled in NC rules and procedures. We have
written some guidelines to help ensure that advance notice is given on
complex issues so that constituencies can debate them and give guidance
to their reps before an NC meeting. Some times these time limits are
met, some times not - they are guidelines not statutes, designed to help
us not bind us.

Philip


on 10/4/01 2:23 AM, Joanna Lane at jo-uk@rcn.com wrote:

> On a point of order, item 8, Recall of GA Chair, should not be 
> included as an Agenda item for the Oct 11 NC meeting as this item was 
> submitted too late to the Intake Committee - 17 days prior to the next

> meeting, which is less than the 21 days required by its adopted rules.
> 
> The basis for this item's inclusion on the NC agenda item would appear

> to amount to a single complaint by one person of the GA. To use Philip

> Shepard's own words to the Intake Committee regarding NC procedures, 
> "Remember, each agenda will have a hyperlink to the e-mail input for 
> that agenda, so anyone can follow the correspondence if they want to 
> spend the time." 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00056.html. There 
> are no hyperlinks for this agenda item because there has been no 
> e-mail input and therefore, no matter how much time NC members may be 
> willing and able to put into it, it would be a complete waste of their

> time.
> 
> For your further information, the e-mail history is as follows:-
> 
> On Sept 23, William X Walsh posted a comment to the General Assembly 
> mailing list requesting a recall of the GA Chair position, copied to 
> the NC Chair.
> 
> On Sept 24, Philip Shepard forwarded the aforementioned comment by 
> William Walsh to the Intake Committee mailing list. 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00306.html.
> 
> On Sept 26, Philip Shepard posted a draft agenda for Oct 11 NC 
> meeting, in which Recall of GA Chair appears as item 8. 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00309.html. In 
> consideration of recent events and priorities dictated by the same, 
> serious consideration of the Intake Committee was not given to this 
> late addition.
> 
> On Oct 1st, Philip Shepard instructed the Secretariat to announce the 
> NC Oct 11 meeting agenda, including item 8. 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00312.html
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Joanna Lane
> 
> --
> 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