[wg-d] Re: [ga] DNSO General Assembly - Revised Agenda

[Elisabeth PORTENEUVE <Elisabeth.PORTENEUVE@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

Caveat:
This is not send to ga@dnso.org -- too much bad faith and demagogy,
I do not want be killed. And I can hardly read 100 messages/hour.
I put wg-d instead.
--

> >>here is the revised agenda for Santiago General Assembly.
> >>due to shortage of time, there may not be coffee break, and the meeting
> >>will extend beyond 17:30 on general discussion.
> >.....
> >>14:30 ICANN Board Member Nomination from DNSO General Assembly
> >>(Objective: discussion on nomination of ICANN Board members in september-
> >> october 1999, followed by election by Names Council in late October)
> >
> >I am not sure this is necessary. I assume that any member of the General
> >Assembly can nominate somebody for the ICANN Board. This can be done
> >electronically.
> >
> >Javier
> 
> Janier's point assumes that a nomination is simply someone saying to the 
> Names Council, "please consider X." I think a nomination ought to have a 
> second and also some critical, but not large, number of supporters (5-10) 
> behind it. This would ensure that nominees had real support among some 
> members of the GA.
> 
>     -- Bret
> 
Bret, some legal advice is necessary for that.
ICANN Bylaws (ARTICLE VI-B, Section 2) states:
      (e) The NC shall forward to the Board, from among those 
          persons nominated by the GA, its selection(s) for the 
          Director(s) to fill any open Board position(s) reserved 
          for the DNSO.... etc
I learned that we need to have legal-legal-legal explanations
to "nomination by GA".
My non-lawyer reading is: anybody from GA can nominate anybody,
and no supporters needed. I may not like it, but the text is here.

Furthermore I am still in limbo concerning GA definition.
I was completely disturbed by the volume of ga@dnso.org
contributions, but even Antony summary to the WGD, much more quiet,
is only questionning:
   | Fourth, there is some confusion (to my mind) about what 
   | the GA is.  It really isn't constituted to be able to vote,
   | because the membership isn't qualified in any way 
   | (abuse problem again).  It also has not been defined at
   | all except in the most general sense by the ICANN Board.  
   | Where does it exist?  Is it on the GA list?  
   | Is that the only place?  Constituencies are part of the 
   | GA too.  How do the constituencies and the rest of the GA meet?

And I am very concerned by some people not willing to be in any
constituency but remaining in the GA, and requesting votes for GA.

Could we address here this role of GA being "political dissedents" ?
I think it was not foreseen in initial DNSO drafts (at least not
in Paris one), and it is clearly human nature aspect.

Elisabeth