RE: [registrars] RE: ballot games

[Nikolaj Nyholm <nikolajn@ascio.com>]

Mike,

I believe that we have two candidates that will serve us equally well (I was
clsoe to abstaining for that reason). I am therefore not reacting against
your nomination of Henning.

However, it is ethically inappropriate that anyone who has access to voting
results, engages in lobbying for a particular candidate.
I am not hinting nor implying that this was indeed the case; I do not care
what our bylaws say on the matter; I am simply concerned that this is most
inappropriate and it is disappointing that you are not able to recognize
this.


I do not want to turn this into an academic discussion, but we should maybe
as constituency in future votes consider, whether the voting period is a
'silent period'.
This is what most civilized democracies would consider as appropriate.


/n

ps. With regards to Rick, I do not care whether it was right or wrong for
him to discuss his services (I was even present in China). 
But I will maintain that it was childish of you to at all bring it into this
discussion - it had absolutely no reference to the ongoing discussion and
therefore it came on as a "look: i'm not the only bad guy here". That does
not serve you well.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael D. Palage [mailto:michael@palage.com]
> Sent: 19. februar 2003 00:39
> To: Nikolaj Nyholm; 'Registrars List'
> Subject: RE: [registrars] RE: ballot games
> 
> 
> 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
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>