ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: GA "Election" was fake, ignore the "results" ( was Re: [ga] Elections Results - vote count)

  • To: <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>, <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: GA "Election" was fake, ignore the "results" ( was Re: [ga] Elections Results - vote count)
  • From: "Debbie Garside" <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 00:54:14 +0100

Hi George

> http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules6.htm
>
> (archived at: http://www.loffs.com/images/garules6draft.pdf )
>
> state:
>
> "Voting is secret; only the Secretariat and the EOC will be
> allowed to see the votes."
>
> If voting was so secret, why don't you explain to everybody
> how Joe Baptista produced the list at:
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg00284.html

I would refer you to the posts made by the chair who changed the voting
procedure, with fair notice to the list whilst asking for
objections/comments, due to the exceptional circumstances as described in my
previous mail to Sotiris.

>
> You can answer that, for starters. Furthermore, the only
> reference I can find to adoption of Draft 6 is at:
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg00093.html
>
> I do not see that they were voted upon by anyone, as was
> required by the prior draft of the rules that the GNSO
> Council voted upon.

> I found no vote in the archives since the GNSO Council
> meeting of early September legitimizing rules #5 (but please
> do point out the vote, if I missed it).

If you look at the GNSO full response you will see that it was conditional
on changes being made.  Those changes were made and draft 6 issued.
>
> Furthermore, the document that you state is version 6 has a
> HTML title of "GA List Rules 0.5" and "Version 0.5 - proposed
> for majority vote to the GA".

If you look at all the drafts you will see that they were all 0.5 as this
was something going back to the old list rules from the DNSO days.


> So I don't go over my limit of posts, I'd also like to
> reiterate my question to Abel as to what he objects to, and
> point out his own posts
> at:
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg07862.html
>
> Where the word "wacko" is used. The post at:
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg05381.html
>
> where the words "being a coward" and "lie" are employed. And lastly,
> at:
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg05370.html
>
> where the words "fascistoide", "comp filled trip of power",
> "vultures", "split tongue woudl ever be able to hiss", "stop
> pretendingt, ful your pockets with the fooosl gold", and
> "There is a word for people of "your kind" where I come from,
> but it is hardly used outside a kennel nowadays."

I think you will find that these posts were all made prior to the GA List
Rules being adopted and therefore Abel's on list behaviour went unmonitored.
Rest assured this would not be the case today.

> My posting is well within the boundaries set by the posts above.

As List Monitor, I have to inform you that you are mistaken.

Kind regards

Debbie
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
>
>
>







<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>