Re: [ga] Point of Order

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@worldatlarge.org>]

Ross Wm. Rader wrote:

>>First, I couldn't find any mention of what a Point
>>of Order is, insofar as it relates to the GA. Is such
>>a rule written down somewhere, even by a record of
>>past consensus? If not, then isn't a Point of Order
>>a dev/nullity?
>>
>
>>From an upper case perspective, quite likely. The fact is thought that
>William has raised a substantive point about the validity of the motion from
>a bylaws perspective.
>
That is not correct.  William has not pointed out the specific ICANN 
ByLaw stipulation that would be violated by Jamie's motion.  In point of 
fact, there is no such stipulation, or ANY rules about what is 
legitimate deliberative material for the GA in the *ICANN ByLaws*.  If 
you, Mr Wader, wish to press the issue, then why don't you please 
produce the relevant section of the ICANN ByLaws.  Otherwise, there is 
no "point of order" as there are no established rules of order for the GA.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

--
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