ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]

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

[registrars] Rules for nominations

  • To: "Registrars Executive Committee" <rc-excom@xxxxxx>, Registrars Constituency <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [registrars] Rules for nominations
  • From: "Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 16:33:34 -0700
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<html>
<body>
Dear Elana and Rick:<br><br>
Here are the provisions from the &quot;Registrars Constituency Rules of
Procedure&quot;, II Election<br><br>
1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Nomination of a candidate shall submit such
candidate's name to the Constituency mailing list. Such nomination may be
accompanied by the Proponent's <font color="#FF0000">endorsement</font>
of the candidate.<br>
&nbsp;<br>
2. Proponent must have <font color="#FF0000">one additional
endorsement,</font> and the nominee must accept, in order to file the
nomination.&nbsp; Such filing is accomplished by sending the nomination
and <font color="#FF0000">endorsement</font> [Note:&nbsp; singular noun]
by electronic means to the Constituency's Secretary. <br><br>
end quote:<br><br>
Question:&nbsp; Is there a requirement for one or two endorsement?&nbsp;
The singular noun would appear to indicate one.<br><br>
Jean-Michel's statement seems to be an endorsement.&nbsp; Jean-Michel
wrote:<br><br>
I would like to nominate Bob Connelly as the alternate
representative.<br><br>
I've known Bob for more than 5 years now from the early time of that big
adventure that Domain Names are, so his experience, and his knowledge
will make him a very good alternate representative.<br><br>
end quote:<br><br>
The second sentence sounds like an endorsement.<br><br>
Sections 3 and 4 on Elections is a bit unusual.&nbsp; They appear to have
been cut and pasted from part I, Motions:<br><br>
<br>
3. The Constituency Secretary will publish the
<font color="#FF0000">motion</font> and call for discussion immediately
and in no case later than within 48 hours of receiving the nomination
from the Proponent.<br>
&nbsp;<br>
4.<font color="#0000FF"> Discussion of the</font>
<font color="#FF0000">motion</font> <font color="#0000FF">will be</font>
<font color="#0000FF">held open on the Constituency list for no less than 14 days.&nbsp; The Chair will moderate the discussion on the list or at any meeting or call, as applicable.&nbsp; <br><br>
</font>[Let us assume that<font color="#FF0000"> &quot;motion&quot;</font> should be read<font color="#FF0000"> &quot;nominations&quot;</font>]<br><br>
Nominations closed some time on Monday.&nbsp; It is now 48 hours after the nominations closed.<br><br>
With my Secretary hat on, I hereby publish the following nominations:<br><br>
- Keller, Thomas<br>
- Rader, Ross Wm.<br>
- Tonkin, Bruce<br>
- Connelly, Robert<br><br>
Further, in accordance with the above referenced Rules, I call for discussion of these nominations.<br><br>
I realize that there is a reason for accelerating the election process.&nbsp; Shortly after the 12 September meeting in Marina del Rey, I called to the attention of Excom that there was a requirement that we handle this election promptly.&nbsp; However, according to these Rules, the discussion should be held open on the Constituency list for no less than 14 days. <br><br>
Unless there is a critical reason to more forward more rapidly, Elana should <font color="#0000FF">moderate the discussion on the list or at any meeting or call, as applicable.&nbsp; <br><br>
</font>I suspect that the GNSO or ICANN By-Laws provide that the terms of Bruce and Thomas are extended until the completion of this election.&nbsp; Thus, there is no critical need to truncate the 14 day requirement.&nbsp; I'm prepared to be told otherwise -- and my mind is open.<br><br>
Cordially submitted,<br>
Bob Connelly<br>
Secretary of the Registrars Constituency<br><br>
</body>
</html>
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>