RE: [registrars] Regarding rules of procedure

[Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

<div>I agree with the quorum idea. Perhaps the quorum is based on names
under management. All votes will still be considered equal, one for
one. But a certain percentage of names needs to represented in the vote
to establish a quorum.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Tim<BR><BR></div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT:
blue 2px solid"><BR>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject:
[registrars] Regarding rules of procedure<BR>From: "Bruce Tonkin"
&lt;Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date: Fri, July 08, 2005
6:17 am<BR>To: registrars@xxxxxxxx<BR><BR>Hello Marcus,<BR><BR>Or maybe
even to two.<BR><BR>Proposer and seconder.<BR><BR>I agree that we have
been too slow to move positions forward to a vote.<BR><BR>I would find
it useful to know how many registrars support a particular<BR>position,
even if not all registrars vote on a particular position.<BR><BR>We may
want to require a minimum number (or percentage of votes) for a<BR>vote
to actually result in a policy position from the constituency
&nbsp;(ie<BR>some sort of quorum
provision).<BR><BR>Regards,<BR>Bruce<BR><BR><BR>&gt; -----Original
Message-----<BR>&gt; From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <BR>&gt;
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marcus
Faure<BR>&gt; Sent: Friday, 8 July 2005 7:19 AM<BR>&gt; To: Nevett,
Jonathon<BR>&gt; Cc: Robert F. Connelly; Registrars Constituency; RC
Voting Members<BR>&gt; Subject: [registrars] Re: Tentative Agenda for
Luxembourg <BR>&gt; ICANN meetings.<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt;
Hi,<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; I suggest to decrease the number of endorsements
necessary <BR>&gt; from 5 to 3. <BR>&gt; This is to encourage more
activity in the RC as I think we <BR>&gt; have not seen enough things
moving in the past.<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Yours,<BR>&gt; Marcus<BR>&gt;
</BLOCKQUOTE>