Re: [ga] Vote on representation first

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dr. Dierker and all,

  Agreed.

  Seems Joop's "Voting Booth" questions are negatively stated.

Hugh Dierker wrote:

>    I suppose, seeing no dissenting opines, that the booth should ask
> to affirmative questions at once.
>
>   Should the GA vote on having representatives?
>
>   Should the representatives be two and equal in nature being
> co-chairs that are subservient to the GA in their capacity as
> representatives?
>
>   Two days to go, there being no seen objection, so we should argue
> this a bit. Remember I am not invested in these questions therefor any
> critique or change is welcomed.
>
>   Eric
>
> kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   I second that. any rep has to be bound to represent the majority or
> consensus on all issues and should not be able to override that ever.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Williams"
> To: "Dominik Filipp"
> Cc: "ga"
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 7:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [ga] Vote on representation first
>
>
> > Dominik and all,
> >
> > Thank you for your clarification of your previous post on
> > this thread.
> >
> > Crystal balls are not needed, common sense is.
> >
> > When we have elected "officials" we as GA members by vote,
> > can consider what's next and how to exercise same. Therefore,
> > horse first than cart. Let's also try to remember that whomever
> > we elect is a servant to the GA members, and not a decision maker
> > for the GA members. Otherwise we will have chaos as was evident
> > and prevalent in the IDNO days...
> >
> > Dominik Filipp wrote:
> >
> >> Jeff,
> >>
> >> the length of our debate over anything will depend on our
> individual
> >> involvement in that. I can't predict this as long as I don't have a
>
> >> crystal ball at my disposal.
> >>
> >> I have no idea how you've come to the conclusion that I'm talking
> about
> >> a subset of GA members to be able to vote. I'm not talking about a
> "new
> >> GA" group or whatever else either.
> >>
> >> I, of course, want everybody on the GA to be able to vote, just
> >> proposing the prior subscribing to the GA list should be mandatory.
>
> >>
> >> The fact we have a voting mechanism is, unfortunately, not
> sufficient
> >> enough in gaining more attention from ICANN however transparent and
>
> >> legitimate the mechanism might seem. You know very well we all here
> can
> >> agree on anything and ICANN can still brush away the results as it
> did
> >> many times in the past. The same would be valid for the results of
> >> voting unless the results are backed up by additional effort of the
>
> >> proposed GA chair and co-chair representatives, who, in my opinion,
>
> >> could also act as the liaisons between the GA and the official
> ICANN
> >> representatives and/or the outside world, ... or at least try to
> act.
> >> That's what I meant by saying "official GA presentation".
> >>
> >> And, of course, once we reach such a status and demonstrate our
> ability
> >> to comprehensibly formulate, discuss, and vote on various issues as
> well
> >> as clearly present the voting results to the public, all this will
> >> undoubtedly contribute to a "new GA" quality.
> >>
> >> Hope, it clarifies now...
> >>
> >> Frankly, I really didn't expect that my words could be so
> >> misinterpreted.
> >>
> >> Dominik
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 7:54 AM
> >> To: Dominik Filipp
> >> Cc: ga
> >> Subject: Re: [ga] Vote on representation first
> >>
> >> Dominika and all,
> >>
> >> Ok, you have although indirectly answered my ?. It seems this
> >> "What/which come first" debate will be rather lengthy. How sad.
> >>
> >> We have no "new GA". We do have a mechanisms by which the GA can
> >> vote. The GA voting does not need any "official"
> >> presentation if voting is done publicly using the voting booth.
> >>
> >> Dominik Filipp wrote:
> >>
> >> > 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
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> --
> >> Jeffrey A. Williams
> >> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders
> strong!)
> >> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
> >> Abraham Lincoln
> >>
> >> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
> very
> >> often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
> >>
> >> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> >> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> >> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> >> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> >> ===============================================================
> >> Updated 1/26/04
> >> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
> div.
> >> of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
> >> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
> >> jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Registered Email addr with the USPS Contact
> >> Number: 214-244-4827
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders
> strong!)
> > "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
> > Abraham Lincoln
> >
> > "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
> > very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
> >
> > "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> > liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> > P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> > United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> > ===============================================================
> > Updated 1/26/04
> > CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> > IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
> > ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
> > E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Registered Email addr with the USPS
> > Contact Number: 214-244-4827
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> -

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827