Re: Our draft

[Einar Stefferud <Stef@nma.com>]

Thanks Kent for extracting those sections to show their inclusion.

They are a good start.n

I would add another specific Fair Hearing Panel as advisory to the
Names Council to serve as a Regional Fair Hearing Panel with members
nominated by regions, as a way to soften the desparate needs most
regions feel to have a quota of votes on the Names Concil, or on the
Board of Directors.

The issue that I see is that regions want to be assured of being given
a fair hearing by the whole of DNSO (and ICANN too).  In fact, in the
immortal words of Marty, I see the GeoPolitical issues of
represenation to be "The Worst Nightmare" of all regions, and also the
worst nightmare of the DNSO Organizers.  

In my view, insisting on having a Board of Directors that have evenly
distributed represeantion of all techncial & business constituenies,
and evenly distributed representaion of geopolitical regions, and also
has fully competent members in all seats, is the grand daddy of all
organizational nightmares.

I propose the DNSO use my Regional Fair Hearing Panel to defuse all
thos nightmares in one deft move, by gauanteeing a fair hearing to all
regions, with a panel that answers only to the Board of Dirctors, adn
whose members are appointed by geopolitical regions.  So, all regions
get a gauranteed voice, but not a vote.

This needs to be written directly into the bylaws!
You may recall that I made this proposal in Monterey?

Cheers...\Stef

>From your message Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:32:08 -0800:
}
}On Thu, Dec 17, 1998 at 06:09:11AM -0400, J. William Semich (NIC JWS7) wrote:
}> I recall that we agreed - and had consensus - on fair hearing panels.
}
}From the latest draft:
}
}  D.  APPLICATIONS FOR MEMBERSHIP IN CONSTITUENCIES 1-5
}
}  After formation of the Names Council, applications for membership
}  in the constituencies 1-5 shall be submitted to the Names Council. 
}  The Names Council shall have the right to approve or disapprove
}  each application.  If an application is not approved, the applicant
}  shall have the right to appeal to the Fair Hearing Panel (described
}  below). 
}
}and
}
}  III.  OPEN AND TRANSPARENT NON-DISCRIMINATORY PROCESSES
}
}  The processes of the Names Council (and the processes of each
}  constituency) shall be governed by the same provisions for open and
}  transparent non-discriminatory processes as those of the Board of
}  the Corporation.  A general mechanism for review of conflicts and
}  grievances will be developed, and the Names Council shall appoint a
}  Fair Hearing Panel which will, among other responsibilities
}  delegated to it by the Names Council, hear appeals pursuant to
}  Section I.D.  of this application. 
}
}  Other such conflicts and grievances heard by this Fair Hearing
}  Panel might include those regarding dominance or control of any
}  single issue by means of membership in more than one constituency,
}  other methods of unfair domination by special interests, matters
}  concerning disputed membership in a constituency or the DNSO,
}  disputes concerning membership dues, either in the DNSO or in a
}  constituency, and so on.
}
}I see on reading this over that the language is not as clear as it
}could be, but the point is that FHPs *are* in the current draft. 
}
}kent
}
}-- 
}Kent Crispin, PAB Chair				"Do good, and you'll be
}kent@songbird.com				lonesome." -- Mark Twain