Re: [ga] Request for a Clarifying Vote

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Adam and all assembly members,

  Despite Thomas objections, I think that Jamie's two potential
motions should be debated, and than voted upon.

  I also believe that Brett's proposal is too weak in it's scope
to be seriously considered, given the results on the Rebid
vote.  But if he wishes to make it a motion for the GA
members and it gets Thomas's imposed 10 seconds,
than it should go to a ballot to be voted upon by the
GA members after debate and potential amendments
if required or considered.

  All this aside however, I am more interested in putting
together with anyone or group that wants to work, as our
members are now doing, in addressing proposals concerning the
Rebid motion and the Motion #2 already voted upon...
To me this would be a much more constructive activity
and approach in dealing with the already existing and known
consensus or the DNSO GA members...



Adam PEAKE wrote:

> Wait on the voting for a minute...
>
> Bret Fausett's put together a simple and I think very acceptable "Case
> for (Only Mild) Reform".
>
> Do we, the GA, agree with Bret's proposals? If not, why not? (And in
> that case what modifications do you propose?)
>
> Rather than voting on anything right now I suggest we see if the GA can
> come up with improvements to Bret's proposals. Once that simple task's
> done... we can vote them up or down.
>
> See
> <http://www.lextext.com/icann/2002/05/24.html#a366> Cost-Effective,
> Trustworthy Global Election
>
> <http://www.lextext.com/icann/2002/05/23.html#a364> The Case for (Only
> Mild) Reform
>
> <http://www.lextext.com/bretsbylaws.html> Redline bylaws
>
> <http://www.lextext.com/bretsmission.html> Redline Mission Statement
>
> Most contentious issue for me is 6 vs. 9 for At Large representation.
> Spent a lot of time on this with NAIS (*I am now speaking for myself*)
> thinking about this and trying to defend 9, but now, I could accept 6.
> Particularly if the ccTLDs (as represented in Bret's model) were to
> ensure a fair voice for end users.
>
> At Large of 6, plus a Canadian CIRA-like system would be work for to me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adam
>
> James Love wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Thomas Roessler" <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
> > : >We should probably have a GA vote on different possible consensus
> > : >positions on the issue of elections.
> > :
> > : New and intelligent arguments may have more impact than another vote
> > :  from the very GA which just asked for a re-bid.
> > :
> >
> >    Even old intelligent arguments are important.
>
> See NAIS and ALSC reports :-)
>
> > Evidence of what is the
> > consensus  is important, regardless of the novelty of the position.   Noise
> > on the GA list is interesting, I guess, but results of these votes can be
> > much more important.   If there is a large supermajority view on the issue
> > of how the board is elected, that would be significant, in Bucharest.
> >
> > Jamie
> >
> > PS.... Motion 2 also addressed the issue of a rebid, as you know.
> >
> > --------------------------------
> > James Love mailto:james.love@cptech.org
> > http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
> >
> > --
> > 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

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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