<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [ga] Vote on representation first
- To: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [ga] Vote on representation first
- From: "Dominik Filipp" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 10:30:01 +0100
- Cc: "ga" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcdDajSlYQLLMQFbSWOey3BXOGOBRwAGqZYg
- Thread-topic: [ga] Vote on representation first
I don't know, Jeff. My order of precedence is clearly stated, though not
detailed yet.
Recently I've also realized we could have something like a GA charter
describing the main principles the new GA voting society would abide by
(such as respecting voting results and their official presentation via
the chair/co-chair, etc.). The charter could then be published on the
booth site.
Dominik
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 8:55 AM
To: Dominik Filipp
Cc: Joop Teernstra; Hugh Dierker; ga
Subject: Re: [ga] Vote on representation first
Dominik and all,
Well now, how long are we or you, Joop, and Dr. Dierker going to
debate and/or argue which should be done first?
Dominik Filipp wrote:
> I would prefer having a chair and a co-chair too, and wouldn't go into
> the personal nomination election for now either.
>
> As for the competence of the future GA chair & co-chair
> representatives, the voting results over issues should be mandatory
> for the representatives and as such delegated to the outside world.
> The representatives, thanks to the natural credibility given by the
> voting public they represent, could therefore gain more respect from
> the ICANN representatives.
>
> I, personally, would start with clarifying the chair (co-chair)
> responsibilities and the subsequent voting on this. In the meantime,
> we could start considering the personal nominations.
>
> By the way, Joop, I like the overall web site look'n'feel, nicely
> done...
>
> Dominik
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|