RE: [registrars] RE: ballot games

["Michael D. Palage" <michael@palage.com>]

Nikolaj:

I regret that we disagree on this issue. As the chair I am allowed to
advocate who I believe is the best candidate to represent the registrar
interests and I have a vote like yourself.

Regarding Rick's misappropriation of Registrar Constituency time during the
China meeting, I do not consider that a minor matter. No elected
representative should allocate time to self promote his own software. This
is wrong and I do not know how you can justify this misuse of registrar
time.  During the registrar meeting scheduled for this Friday, the sponsors
that will be giving presentations are all paying for our time. Rick should
be no different.

I personally see nothing wrong with me advocating Henning. In fact Tina Dam,
a former employee of ASCIO, now a consultant with TUCOWS was on the phone
with other TUCOWS employees trying to get out the vote for Elliot. By last
counts it was three against one.

I also have another interesting question for Rick.  I had one registrar that
had paid their dues but which had not registered to vote fax in the form.
Within minutes of that form being faxed to the registrar constituency list a
TUCOWS employee was calling that registrar telling them how I had acting
inappropriately and how they could change their vote.

Listen people are going to vote for who they believe is the best candidate.
I still believe that Henning is the best candidate and I will continue to
throw my full support behind him.

Regarding the extension of time, it was suggested for a number of reasons:
several registrars that were eligible to vote had not yet registered with
the system (AOL, NETEKA, MarkMonitor, to name just a few), some were snowed
in and could not get to work; many people were going to be traveling, the
names council had recently extended its voting period because of the US
Holiday and the bad weather.

Personally, the people that I have been calling I have given a dead line of
Wed 12:00 GMT. The original voting deadline. In fact most of these people
have been submitting their votes via fax.

Best regards,

Mike


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Nikolaj Nyholm
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 5:38 PM
> To: 'Michael D. Palage'; 'Registrars List'
> Subject: RE: [registrars] RE: ballot games
>
>
> Mike,
>
> This attack on Rick is plainly childish and does not serve you well.
>
> It is very clear - you crossed an ethical and moral line the
> moment you, as
> constituency chair, started lobbying for a particular candidate.
> You further compromised your standing by suggesting an extension of the
> voting period.
>
>
> Regards,
> Nikolaj
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael D. Palage [mailto:michael@palage.com]
> > Sent: 18. februar 2003 23:20
> > To: Rick Wesson
> > Cc: Registrars Executive Committee; Registrars List
> > Subject: [registrars] RE: ballot games
> > Importance: High
> >
> >
> > Rick,
> >
> > My backing Henning has NOTHING to do with me seeking a ICANN
> > Board seat. If
> > you would take the time to read the by-laws instead of
> > self-promoting your
> > fraud-it services during registrar constituency meeting you
> > would see that
> > Henning/Elliot will be selection Board seats 1-8, I hopefully will be
> > seeking a Board seat 13-14. So you are wrong once again.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Rick Wesson [mailto:wessorh@ar.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 5:11 PM
> > > To: Michael D. Palage
> > > Cc: Registrars Executive Committee; Registrars List
> > > Subject: RE: ballot games
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike,
> > >
> > > I am concerned about the integrity of the process, and that we have
> > > changed the process and that WE (you and I) need to be
> > careful of how
> > > vested we are in the nomination of these canadates. Since
> > both you and I
> > > have access to the vote results during the vote we can see
> > who is voting
> > > for whom and who has changed their vote.
> > >
> > > We agreed to extend the ballot for 24 hours because of weather
> > > conditions though I doubt weather conditions played any
> > role in the 6
> > > new registrars recent signup.
> > >
> > > If you are actively campaigning for one canadate while you
> > have access to
> > > privileged information, your actions can create the
> > appearance of a game.
> > >
> > > Since you have stated that you wish to be on the GNSO board
> > [1] you have
> > > an interest in who is on the nomination committee.
> > >
> > > you are walking a fine line campaigning for someone who may
> > potentially
> > > nominate you for a board seat. I also feel deceived because
> > at the excom
> > > meeting you and ken advocated that we needed to extend the
> > vote because of
> > > weather conditions -- It was I that was being "snowed" not DC.
> > >
> > > using inside information or your position for political or
> > personal gain
> > > is wrong and I hope that is not what is going on here.
> > >
> > >
> > > -rick
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc02/msg00371.html
> > >
> > > On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Michael D. Palage wrote:
> > >
> > > > Rick:
> > > >
> > > > I am a little confused. I have been actively calling registrars
> > > telling them
> > > > to get out and vote, while simulateously advocating Henning who
> > > I nominated.
> > > > In fact, TUCOWS employees have been doing the same and even asking
> > > > registrars to change their vote. Having registrars cast a
> > vote is a good
> > > > thing. Having registrars become active in the constituency by
> > > paying dues is
> > > > a good thing. Since the constituency was formed we have
> > always allowed a
> > > > registrar to vote provided that they met the qualifications. If
> > > they said
> > > > payment was forth coming we would wait. If the payment
> > came their vote
> > > > counted. Check the archieves, I am not making it up.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Rick Wesson [mailto:wessorh@ar.com]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 4:05 PM
> > > > > To: Registrars Executive Committee
> > > > > Cc: Registrars List
> > > > > Subject: ballot games
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I have received numerous requests to add registrars to the
> > > boardrooms.org
> > > > > site today, and one fax with a vote on it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I feel we are very near to compromising the integrity
> > of the executive
> > > > > committee.
> > > > >
> > > > >   a) in the future we should only allow those to vote who are
> > > eligible at
> > > > >      the time of the ballot issuance.
> > > > >
> > > > >   b) we shouldn't allow new processes to be initiated
> > during a ballot
> > > > >
> > > > >   c) we should only allow those members in good standing to
> > > participate.
> > > > >      we have several members who are in limbo because
> > various payment
> > > > >      were not received.
> > > > >
> > > > >   d) we should not extend the ballot period with out a clear
> > > justification
> > > > >      and documentation for such. the request for
> > extention yesterday
> > > > >      which I originally agreed with is just one issue
> > that makes me
> > > > >      question the motivation.
> > > > >
> > > > > All of the above recommendations allow for a more
> > predictable ballot
> > > > > process with a greater level of integrity that we are
> > > currently working
> > > > > under.
> > > > >
> > > > > In short I'm not sure of the gaming being played here, or if
> > > there is even
> > > > > a game being played; but I am VERY uneasy with the
> > > undocumented process
> > > > > surrounding this ballot and if the executive committee is
> > > working in the
> > > > > best of the constituency any more.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -rick
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>