ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

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

Re: [ga] Vote on representation first

  • To: kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Joop Teernstra <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Vote on representation first
  • From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 08:05:19 -0800 (PST)
  • Cc: ga <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=WTsxsFtQP99UGwAZ/p/A8XkFFFEjCiLHzOfSqW9ROBsqvTqL/Z/VD86Mom4BX1CGnagDmfdcx4qvS3w38wdG5BFn8Ve0++VQpLcYrHf7+V/tOazPTHBm74VhIEUL7vyjoVb+XgIpXE22REsqRBTTTjZw3AKsW4EldLXnpbiMCQk= ;
  • In-reply-to: <000501c74143$587d2800$1701a8c0@WebBusiness>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Joop is running the booth. I think we can do it many ways but first we should decide whether there is an interest in voting and having representatives. I think we can vote on both that issue and what kind of representatives, at the same time. (I suppose by simple logic by registration one indicates a preference that we do have reps) 
  I propose co-chairs of equal value to work in tandem at the GA direction.  And that their role would be that of spokespersons and not independent.
   
  Eric
  

kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Please describe all voting options as they stand now. Will there be 
nominations? Did I miss something here?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joop Teernstra" 
To: "Hugh Dierker" 
Cc: "ga" 
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 9:10 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Vote on representation first


> At 12:42 p.m. 26/01/2007, Hugh Dierker wrote:
>>I propose that;
>>
>>First we vote to determine if we want elected representatives from the GA 
>>to the outside world?
>>
>>If we get a no vote on that we fold up the tents and go on down the road.
>>
>>If we get a yes, we argue for awhile and come up with the structure we 
>>want to vote on and the authority of the representatives.
>>
>>It seems to me to require a two step process so we don't get bogged down 
>>before we even agree to have representatives.
>>
>
>
> Personally, I would vote Other and ask for a simultaneous chair and a 
> co-chair election.
>
> We have all 5 days to argue and persuade our 21 voters what would be the 
> best way to use this first ballot. :-) Fun.
>
> Personally I think voting for a representative now is a bad idea; we don't 
> yet know what we want it to mean. A representative of all the GA list 
> subscribers? The physical attendees? Only of us, the 21 first voters? Of 
> the typical individual DNS users? Etc.
>
> That would have to be polled first. The Chair could decide that poll's 
> options.
>
> Without a chair (and a back-up chair) we will keep floundering.
>
>
> -joop-
> 



 
---------------------------------
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started!
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>