RE: [registrars] Regarding rules of procedure

[Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

<div>Perhaps, or we go by the most recent gTLD reports publicly available
on ICANN's site.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Or maybe there's a better solution. The point of my suggestion is
that neither large or small registrars can capture an election or a
vote. I was thinking that if a quorum is based on names represented
then at least some of the large registrars have to represented, a group
of smaller registrars representing 10% of the names couldn't decide a
vote. I'm just still concerned about all of phantom registrations out
there, and the ExCom really has no way of knowing who is who.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Perhaps a quorum could be a combination of a minimum names under
management and some percentage of members.</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: RE:
[registrars] Regarding rules of procedure<BR>From: "John Berryhill"
&lt;john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date: Fri, July 08, 2005 1:07
pm<BR>To: "Tim Ruiz" &lt;tim@xxxxxxxxxxx&gt;, "Bruce
Tonkin"<BR>&lt;Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Cc:
registrars@xxxxxxxx<BR><BR>&gt;I agree with the quorum idea. Perhaps
the quorum is based on names <BR>&gt;under management. All votes will
still be considered equal, one for <BR>&gt;one. But a certain
percentage of names needs to represented in the <BR>&gt;vote to
establish a quorum.<BR><BR>... including names within the add/grace
period at the time of the vote. </BLOCKQUOTE>