Re: [wg-review] Re: Are we dead?

[Derek Conant - DNSGA <dconant@dnsga.org>]

Thank you for letting this WG know that you did not vote in the WG voting
process.

I believe that it was a great benefit for the WG, and for everyone involved, that you participated in the WG.  Also, it is good that you realized that your vote could have had a material effect on the direction of the WG and that this is why you did not vote.

Derek Conant
 

Ken Stubbs wrote:

speaking only for myself (as i have no knowledge of any other's actions) i did not vote... even though i was invited to do so. personally though, i feel that i should be entitled to vote but the number of voters is so infinitely small that my vote could have had a material effect and this was why i did not ... ken stubbs

----- Original Message -----

From: Derek Conant - DNSGA

To: sotiris@hermesnetwork.com

Cc: wg-review@dnso.org

Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 11:34 PM

Subject: Re: [wg-review] Re: Are we dead?

 Giving credit to the DNSO/WG, I believe that the WG really tried to put in place a fair and clearly defined process within the WG, however, the fundamental flaw in the WG process appears to be that ICANN policy makers may have participated within the WG voting process of which the WG relied upon for its direction.

I raised the question:  Have any representatives of ICANN/NC, or representatives of any other ICANN policy making body, vote within this WG voting process?  DNSO/WG did not reply to my question.  See, copy of DNSGA comment at DNSO URLs below:
1.)   http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-review/Arc02/msg02152.html
2.)   http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-review/Arc02/msg02180.html

Representatives of ICANN/NC, or representatives of any other ICANN policy making body, should have known better and acknowledged their conflict of interest if they in fact voted within the WG voting process to unduly influence its direction.

Derek Conant
 

Sotiropoulos wrote:

"Randel H. Hanes" <hanes@hanesdesktop.net> wrote:

>Apparently this work group's function has played out. Now the DNSO is the
>"DNSO public comments on the DNSO Review Task Force Report v2" phase.

Phase?  Do you mean to say that you've seen evidence of clearly defined process
in the workings of the DNSO?

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
          Hermes Network, Inc.

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
          Hermes Network, Inc.

--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html