Re: [wg-d] The bylaws.

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

> As a member of the Names Council representing a constituency, I could not
> approve them, because it means giving away all the power that my
> constituency has in the process to whomever screams louder in the GA. As a
> matter of fact, it means that the DNSO will be completelly inactive,because
> nothing final will ever come of the GA on any issue.

May I remind you that one's job on the NC is simply to objectively count
the consensus of the other DNSO bodies. It would not be proper to tilt
one's assessment of that consensus based on one's constituency
affiliation.

It is sad that anyone would indicate that he/she would hold constituency
membership above the fair counting of the consensus of the opinions of
others.

If a NC member finds that he/she can not do a fair job in evaluating the
consensus that comes from the other parts of the DNSO, then I suggest that
that member should immediately leave the NC.


------------

> >Since the GA is going to have an election on the candidates in order to
> >create the panel of nominees that it sends to the GA, it is useful, that
> >candidates generate some minimal support.
 
> We may each interpret the bylaws in a different way, but trying to come out
> with procedures that say that the NC has no power whatsoever... and passing
> them to the NC for approval, seems like a waste of time to me. 

It sounds as if you are threatening a war between the GA and the NC if the
GA does not submit and become simply the powerless footstool of the NC.

Nobody is saying the NC has no duties.

The NC's power is *very* clearly stated, it is to manage the consenus
building by the other parts of the DNSO.

But the NC has no right to approve or disapprove anything (except some
procedural matters clearly spelled out in the ICANN bylaws.)

As clearly described in the ICANN bylaws, all the NC does is to figure out
whether there is consensus, what degree, and according to the degree, to
forward the results to the ICANN board.

That's the NC's powers and duties in a nutshell.

Oh yes, the NC also gets to select among the panel of nominees to the
ICANN board that the GA sends.

So please don't say that the NC is powerless.  It has the power it was
given, it needs no more.

And I, for one, am certainly not advocating anything that would add any
additional approval power whatsoever to the Names Council.


-------------

 
> The NC votes and elects directors. Yu can try to bend that as much as you
> can, but it in the letter as well as the spirit of the bylaws. The GA
> nominates, but it does not vote. It does not mandate the NC who it has to
> elect, that is really trying to bend the bylaws.

Nope.  The NC selects among the panel put forth by the GA.  But the GA
slects the panel.  That is both the letter and the spirit.

You are trying to eliminate the GA by not giving it any power to determine
who is on that panel.

You say "The GA nominates, but it does not vote."

Yes, the GA nominates -- just like bodies all over the world, it gets
people to step forward and then it votes among itself as to which of those
people will be the GA's nominees.

You may thing the word "nominates" is a powerless thing.  But it is not,
it involves a complex process, yet to be determined, but which will
involve a selection among those who have stepped forward, through which
the GA, selects the slate of nominees that it will present to the NC, from
which the NC then selects the ICANN board seats.

The ICANN bylaws clearly say that the GA nominates.  The ICANN bylaws
could have said that the NC votes on anyone who choses to stand for
election, it would have been easy to write that down.  But instead the
language clear says that the General Assembly, not the members, but the
General Assembly itself, shall take the positive action of nominating.

And the GA acts through the vote of its members.

That is not "bending" the bylaws.

		--karl--