Re: [ga] Vote

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dr. Dierker and all,

  I agree fully.  It seems Joop has a different agenda and it seems he
may have in mind as himself as chair with his suggestion of a "Vice
Chair" as his aid of some sort.  Maybe I am reading too much into
his reading and actions?  I hope Joop will correct me if I am, and
be more specific as to his "Vice Chair" idea?

Hugh Dierker wrote:

>   I hate to be a pain but sometimes wording means something. You
> cannot have a chair and a co-chair, perhaps the word being looked for
> is vice chair. Co denotes and equal cooperation in which case the
> would both be co-chairs. Vice indicates an order of succession and
> power, vice being secondary to the prime.
>
>   Representative is and adjective indicating someone who goes out on
> behalf of other(s). Obviously a chairman of a group is a
> representative of that group. It would only be up to that group to set
> forth the degree of representativeness in general or specific.
>
>   The aforementioned illustrates the need to not take these matters
> off list and to handle them in a consensus manner prior to voting. The
> voting booth was a one nonelected man endeavor which was nice of him
> to do but only proved the impropriety of doing it that way. Let us do
> the continuing work to be done here. The fact that people signed up
> but did not vote is even more reason to do it here.
>
>   Eric
>
> Joop Teernstra <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   At 02:13 p.m. 4/02/2007, Hugh Dierker wrote:
> >I would suggest that we quickly move forward again. This time I would
>
> >suggest we vote here and come up with a consensus as to the wording
> of the
> >next vote. For for that matter we could just come up with a consensus
> on
> >the vote.
> >
>
>
>
> I concur that it is now time to discuss the next step here.
>
>
> In the Booth we have had 11 votes so far - these voters might not have
>
> voted on the list. On the other hand, why have the other 10
> self-registered
> voters not voted?
> Is more time needed?
>
> Below are the results of the first vote; I think it is fair to take
> that
> as guidance for the next step. Voters appear to want to elect a chair
> (and
> a co-chair) rather than a representative.
>
> These were the questions:
>
> Provided that GA members will come up with nominations, what position
> would
> you first like to hold elections for?
>
> 1. GA Chair, to lead and formalize debate
>
> 2. a GA "representative" to the ICANN Board and the wider world
>
> 3. another position (please describe)
>
> 4. No elections, just referenda on our opinions
>
>
> One Feb 2,. we had 11 votes
>
> GA chair: 4 votes
>
> GA representative: 2 votes
>
> other: 4 votes
>
> NO elections: 1 votes
>
> Total votes: 11
>
> Under "Other", we had the following comments/suggestions
>
> 1.joop teernstra:
>
> We should vote for a Chair and a co-Chair as backup. We would not want
>
> everything that
> gets organized to fall apart as soon as the Chair has got enough.
>
> 2.Matthew Pemble:
>
> Wouldn't the Chair / co-Chair also be able fulfil (if practical) the
> role
> as a representative to ICANN?
>
> 3.Chris McElroy aka NameCritic:
>
> GA Chair is fine, Representative to ICANN and the world at large also,
> but
> believe we also
> need to define broad areas of interest like consumer protection, new
> tlds, registries
> and registrars, etc. and split the duties among several people on the
> list
> qualified
> to coordinate things in each specific area. They would also try to
> recruit
> more people
> to join the GA with similar interests. Someone could even hold the
> position
> of recruiting
> officer.
>
> 4.Eric Dierker:
>
> First we must vote on IF we want representation. And then we can also
> vote
> on the kind of
> representation and I believe there should be the option of two
> co-chairs.
> And I believe the voting should not be able to vote until the 1st of
> February.
> Also the discussion should not be here in any regard it should always
> be on
> the GA list and only there.
> Eric Hugh Dierker 1/30/07
>
> Three of the "other" votes are in favour of a Chair and Co-chair
> election,
> making a total of 7 votes in favour of a Chair election.
>
>
> >
> >Next Item
> >
> >Debate as to the first elected person(s) from here.
> >My vote is for an equal co-chair position that will run things here
> and be
> >sent by us to represent us elsewhere.
>
> I would support that.
>
> >I lean toward a spokesperson concept rather than a freewheeling
> President
> >position. Hopefully internally the two would represent pros and cons
> here
> >and then go forth with both our majority consensus position and our
> >minority position and do it all here for optimum oppeness and
> transparency.
>
> Let us see if we can now come up with a consensus job description for
> the
> chair and co-chair. Then the nominee(s) will have some guidance to
> accept a
> nomination (or not).
>
> Chris wants more persons having more roles. Great if we have enough
> active
> GA members.
> But first things first.
> A chair can lay down the procedure and determine consensus about the
> next
> vote's wording.
>
> -joop-
>
>
>
> -

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