Re: [registrars] Transfers TF Report

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

> we don't have a process to take an issue to a vote. we have a proposal
> from mike and tim is tasked with developing by-laws to deal with the
> process.
>
> I'd love to hear other proposals.

Practically speaking, we have an important issue that the Constituency needs
to get pretty explicit about pretty quickly.

Practically speaking, we have a proposed course of action before us that
will allow us to get pretty explicit pretty quickly.

Practically speaking, we need a way to get this proposed course of action to
a vote prior to roughly the 12th of this month in order that our Names
Council reps don't look like dorks when they are asked "What does your
constituency think about the TF report".

Rob has suggested some amendments, Mike has proposed an alternate ballot.
Frankly, I only care what the question looks like as long as we provide our
NC reps with sufficient guidance to allow them to cast an informed vote.

Frankly, I'm getting rather peeved that we have let discussions of process
get in the way of practice for the last two years. I *understand* that
people are busy, but none of these issues are surprises. It's been at least
a week that we've known about the fact I was putting forward a ballot and
its been a full year that we've known we have to elect new budget cmtee
reps. None of this is rocket science - why do we have to continually make it
so complicated?

For the sake of ensuring that we get some traction, let's continue amending
the ballot that is on the floor until such time that no further amendments
are forthcoming (ie - it has a reasonable level of support in the
constituency so as not to be viewed as "frivolous"). If we can't at least
agree on this much, then I will completely withdraw the motion and leave it
to someone else to sort out.


                       -rwr




"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- Steven Wright

Got Blog? http://www.byte.org/blog

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Wesson" <wessorh@ar.com>
To: "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>
Cc: "Michael D. Palage" <michael@palage.com>; <registrars@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: [registrars] Transfers TF Report


>
>
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
>
> > > I do not know if it answered your question. Ideally this is far from a
> > > perfect solution but it is the best that we currently have.
> >
> > Not really - I'm still not completely sure what the process is to take
my
> > proposal to a vote.
>
> we don't have a process to take an issue to a vote. we have a proposal
> from mike and tim is tasked with developing by-laws to deal with the
> process.
>
> I'd love to hear other proposals.
>
> -rick
>
>