RE: [registrars] Extension of the nomination period until 1st May

["Jeffrey Eckhaus" <jeckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I will second Jay for Secretary
 
 
Jeff
________________________________

From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bhavin Turakhia
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 11:46 AM
To: 'Registrars Constituency'
Subject: [registrars] Extension of the nomination period until 1st May
 
hi all,
 
I never knew that my stepping down would result in so much discussion
:). The period of nomination and acceptance stands extended until the
1st of May. I must clarify the following -
 
* The reason I am extending the time period is not because I believe
there is an issue of geographic diversity within the excom. I too
believe that the issue of geographic diversity will not end up making a
dramatic difference to the excomm functions. None of the decisions that
I took in my last two years were based upon the fact that I am from
India. Additionally we have council members on the mailing list from
Canada, Australia and Germany. In most cases all issues discussed in the
ex-comm are open to the council members and there input has always been
welcomed and respected. Therefore the absence of geographic diversity in
the ex-comm will not any significant negative impact to my mind. Infact
the currently nominated candidates represent a diverstiy in the size of
the Registrar which to my mind is more important than geographic
diversity
 
* I was intending to extend the nomination period as such, irrespective
of the email exchange, to allow for candidates to accept their
nominations and be seconded. Therefore this extension is NOT a result of
the email exchange on the list
 
* Some folks have suggested that I extend the nomination period only for
the post of the secretary. However I am not comfortable doing an
extension for a single post. Therefore the nomination period as a whole
stands extended until 1st May
 
* Over and above this I would like to nominate "Jay Westerdal" to the
position of Secretary, and I hope someone seconds the same, incase John
Berryhill remains silent until 1st May. Infact Jay has to my mind been
one of the more active participants in the Constituency, and I would
love for him to participate in the excomm (as long as he is interested).
 
Thanks
Bhavin
 
	 
	
________________________________

	From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nevett, Jonathon
	Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 6:17 PM
	To: Rob Hall; Robert F. Connelly; Registrars Constituency
	Subject: RE: [registrars] Stepping down from the Constituency
Chair nomination
	Bhavin/Bob:
	 
	I suggest that you extend the nomination period for the position
of Secretary.  This would give John B. the ability to accept the
nomination and file a COI within the deadline if he is interested in the
position, and would give Bob and any others the ability to nominate
someone outside of the U.S. if they so desire.  Thanks.
	 
	Jon
	 
	
________________________________

	From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rob Hall
	Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 11:20 PM
	To: Robert F. Connelly; Registrars Constituency
	Subject: RE: [registrars] Stepping down from the Constituency
Chair nomination
	 
	Bob,
	 
	You should not be suggesting that Bhavin withdrawing from the
race at the time of his choosing was somehow wrong or inappropriate.
Bhavin has served our constituency proudly for the last 2 years.  His
reasons for withdrawal and the timing of his announcement are not for us
to decide.  And I for one do not believe he has acted in a way to
deliberately do harm to the constituency.  Just the opposite in fact.
	 
	As well, you keep claiming we have somehow lost something
because we are no longer as geographically diverse as only US based
people have stepped up to answer the call.
	 
	It only serves to diminish those that have put their name
forward and are willing to VOLUNTEER to work on behalf of the
constituency.  I can not support statements that lend themselves to
somehow tarnishing the current nominees for volunteering just because
they happen to live in the US.  You are basically suggesting the current
slate is inappropriate in some way. 
	 
	I also believe opening the nominations because a candidate you
supported withdrew would be wrong. The right to nominate is yours.  In
fact, you could have nominated as many people as you wanted at anytime.
If you really thought geo diversity was such a huge issue, why did you
not nominate anyone else during the nomination period ?
	 
	The right to accept the nomination or withdraw was solely
Bhavins.  I would also point out that Bhavin had no need to actually
withdraw.  He never accepted the nomination.  He took the high road to
take the time to write us a letter and even explained some of his
reasoning's.  But as of midnight last night, he was actually no longer a
candidate as he had not accepted the nomination by the close of
business.  He did absolutely nothing inappropriate
	 
	I also would point out that the current candidates must still
get a minimum number of positive votes from the constituency to be
elected.  If you feel the current candidates are not appropriate for
whatever reason, you may exercise your right to vote against them.  If
the will of the constituency agrees, then the current nominees will not
be elected into the position.  It is the will of the constituency that
will ultimately decide our officers.
	 
	We count on our secretary to know our bylaws and to enforce them
without any personal bias.  To somehow try and use your position as
secretary to re-open nominations because of your personal beliefs or
your thinking that your nomination or vote was wasted is not
appropriate.
	 
	 
	 
	Rob.
	 
	 
	 
	
________________________________

	From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Robert F.
Connelly
	Sent: Thu 27-Apr-06 8:59 PM
	To: Registrars Constituency
	Subject: RE: [registrars] Stepping down from the Constituency
Chair nomination
	At 03:11 PM 4/27/06, Tim Ruiz wrote:
	
	>Bob, not sure what you meant in the above comment, but to be
clear, all
	>of the candidates have been seconded. And all except John
Berryhill
	>have accepted and posted their COI statements.
	
	Dear Tim:  Oops, sorry about that.
	
	<snip>
	
	>Finally, Bhavin placed the deadline for nominations as 4/26/06.
Not sure
	>what the procedure would be to reopen it, or if there is one.
But there
	>isn't exactly an avalanche of interest.
	
	It seems to me that Bhavin's act of withdrawing on
*the_day_after* he
	proposed closing nominations has some implications.  Our
geographical
	diversity depended upon his candidacy   *Bhavin* should
therefore reopen
	nominations.  Those who nominated and seconded his nomination,
and those of
	us who stood by silently and approved, deserve no less than
that:
	
	Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:19:18 +0530
	Thank you Marcus and Richard for nominating me,
	
	I have given this some thought, and had some discussions with
Jon. I had
	taken up the position of Chair after significant deliberation 2
years ago.
	
	end quote:
	
	Cordially, BobC