[registrars] RE: Votebot

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

Mike said....

"P.S. Regarding my previous post about how our Registrar Constituency
Representative should vote. A third option which has been suggest to me
is to keep the current default process, where Representatives vote what
they feel is most representative and in the best interest of the
constituency. Here are the argued pro and con in connection with this
option.

The biggest "con" to this scenario is that you can have rouge Names
Council representatives vote on matters that are inconsistent with
constituency viewpoints. The argument to date has always been that rouge
Name Council representatives can be voted out when they stand for
re-election. One of the topics that has been discussed in connection
with the ICANN Board is that an elected Director must act in the best
interest of the corporation and not at the direction of his constituents
that placed him/her there. As I said I do not know the answer as to how
our names council representatives should vote in close contested issues.
"

Mike - here's a suggestion for the constituency to consider: Where
possible, I've been a strong advocate in providing our NC reps with
clear direction as to how they should vote. I strongly believe that they
shouldn't be voting (except in the most administrative of matters)
without first consulting the constituency. In reading your email it
struck me that the most effective way of directing the NC reps to vote
would be to assign 26.66 percent weight to each of their votes. What I
mean is that for each 27% support a proposition gets from the
constituency, it earns one of our NC rep votes. If a proposition gains
80% support, it has earned all three votes. We could refine this further
to take into account abstentions etc., but at first glance, this appears
like it might clear up some of the confusion that I have seen over the
last little bit.

Any thoughts from the membership/reps on an approach like this?

-rwr