<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [registrars] Discussion of Motion to adopt Tasting Position Statement [Tim Ruiz's motion].
<html>
<body>
At 01:41 PM 11/14/2007 Wednesday -0500, Ross Rader wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I'm pretty uncomfortable with
the fact that it continues to be the <br>
case that it takes us way to long to make really simple
decisions.</blockquote><br>
Dear Ross: As you know, I fought for two years to enacting a Fast
Track option. I, for one, would not be opposed to handling Tim's
motion on a Fast Track. I think we only need majority approval of
the four voting members of Excom plus five endorsements. Here are
the Rules:<br><br>
II.FAST TRACK MOTIONS 1. Notwithstanding the above, certain motions may
receive ?Fast Track? treatment. <br><br>
2. Requests for Fast Track treatment may be made by any Member at any
scheduled meeting of the Constituency or electronically on the
Constituency list and must include a written justification supporting the
Fast Track treatment. <br><br>
3. Fast Track treatment only is available in exigent circumstances.
Exigent circumstances exist if following the standard timing of a motion
in Section I above would dramatically harm the value or effectiveness of
the motion and it would not have been reasonable to have foreseen the
need for such a motion at a time when a Section I motion was viable. For
example, the Constituency may need to respond quickly to an unforeseen
request of a third party, such as ICANN, the Constituency may want to
issue a position statement on a matter that mandates fast action, or the
Constituency must address a policy issue through a Fast Track motion
because it would have been impossible to have addressed the issue through
a Section I motion. <br><br>
4. A motion may be considered to be Fast Track only upon
<font color="#FF0000">a majority vote of the Constituency Executive
Committee. </font>In considering whether to approve Fast Track treatment,
the Executive Committee should consider the justification for the
treatment, only grant it in exceptional circumstances, and provide a
written summary of its rationale in approving it. <br><br>
5.Motions to amend the Bylaws or these Rules are ineligible for Fast
Track treatment. <br><br>
6. Any motion receiving Fast Track treatment made at an in-person meeting
must also be published on the Constituency list prior to a vote.
<br><br>
<font color="#FF0000">7.Fast Track motions must have 5 endorsements to
proceed to a vote. <br><br>
</font>8. After discussion, a vote will be called on a Fast Track motion
by the Chair of the Constituency or Vice Chair if the Chair is
unavailable. The timing of the vote must be announced on the Constituency
list and all Members, who are eligible to vote pursuant to Section 4.5.1
of the Bylaws and are registered to vote prior to the call for the vote,
may vote regardless or not if they are present at an in-person meeting.
The call for the vote on the Constituency list must occur at least six
hours prior to the end of the vote. <br><br>
9. Fast Track motions and any unfriendly amendment thereto will be deemed
as adopted by an affirmative vote of two-thirds or more of the votes
cast. <br><br>
10. Notwithstanding Sections 7 above, if in any vote on a Fast Track
motion fewer than the larger of (a) 33% of those Members registered to
vote or (b) 18 Members registered to vote actually vote (which total
shall include votes cast for and against the motion, and any
abstentions), such vote will be deemed defeated. <br><br>
11. If a Fast Track motion is defeated, it may be made again to the
Constituency using the standard motion procedures in Section I above.
<br><br>
12. The voting results of all Fast Track motions will be published on the
Constituency list, including specific ballots cast by Members<br><br>
end quote:<br><br>
There is one problem that must be dealt with. We need five
endorsements *outside* Excom. The present endorsers are as
follows:<br><br>
At 01:13 PM 11/9/2007 Friday -0800, Robert F. Connelly <br>
At 10:01 AM 11/12/2007 Monday +0100, Thomas Keller <br>
At 11:08 PM 11/12/2007 Monday +1100, Adrian Kinderis<br><br>
My endorsement could not be counted. I interpret that the text in
red implies the four *voting* members of Excom. That was the way it
was discussed when Jon drafted the Fast Track text. That would mean
that Thomas' and Adrian's endorsements are still valid for a fast track
motion. <br><br>
Ross, there has been a discussion in Excom that we don't need to elect
our delegate, so that should not be a problem.<br><br>
Regards. BobC, acting in my capacity as Secretary of the RC.<br><br>
<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Can we just cut to the chase and
find someone to help us write this <br>
document? Are there any volunteers? Jothan - is this work that you
can <br>
help us with? Jeff? Anyone? </blockquote><br><br>
PS: Do you mean you don't want Tim's document?<br><br>
</body>
</html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|