ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]

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

[registrars] Re: RESULTS: Restart of balloting on Domain Tasting, View 1 & View 2

  • To: Registrars Constituency <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [registrars] Re: RESULTS: Restart of balloting on Domain Tasting, View 1 & View 2
  • From: "Robert F. Connelly" <BobC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 23:28:49 -0800
  • List-id: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<html>
<body>
At 04:00 PM 2/6/2008 Wednesday&nbsp; -0800, BobC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:<br><br>
Dear Registrars and Observers:&nbsp; I find there were only two members
who attempted to vote but were unable to do so.&nbsp; Here are the
adjustments.<br><br>
First adjustment of total from 41 to 40.&nbsp; This kind of discrepancy
usually results from an autoreply returning an unmarked ballot.<br><br>
Second adjustment, one vote each for View 1 and View 2, as shown at end
of each detailed sub-total, below.&nbsp; (masonc@snapnames for Vision 2,
registry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for Vision1).<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Results for Restart of balloting
on Domain Tasting, View 1 &amp; View 2<br>
Number of ballots received: 41-1=40<br><br>
An HTML version of the result is available at
<a href="http://registrars.beach.net/votes/"; eudora="autourl">
http://registrars.beach.net/votes/</a><br>
Which view do you agree with?<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with view 1&nbsp; 23<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with view 2&nbsp; 7<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with both views&nbsp; 4<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Do not agree with either view&nbsp; 3<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Abstain&nbsp; 3</blockquote><br>
With second adjustment:<br><br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with view 1&nbsp; 23+1=24<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with view 2&nbsp; 7+1=8<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with both views&nbsp; 4<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Do not agree with either view&nbsp; 3<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Abstain&nbsp; 3<br><br>
Comparing View 1 and View 3, 24/32=0.75 or 75%, 8/32=0.25 or
25%.<br><br>
 From here on it gets more difficult to analyze.&nbsp; We are entering
uncharted waters.&nbsp; We have never held a vote of this kind.<br><br>
Considering the 4 agreeing with both and 3 agreeing with neither might
have the effect of increasing View 1 and View 2 by one vote
each.<br><br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with view 1&nbsp; 23+1+1=25<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with view 2&nbsp; 7+1+1=9<br>
<s>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with both views&nbsp; 4<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Do not agree with either view&nbsp; 3<br>
</s>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Abstain&nbsp; 3<br><br>
[There was an error in this calculation in the text sent to Voting
Members.]<br><br>
But what do we do with the abstains?&nbsp; In a
&quot;Yes/No/Abstain&quot; motion, we add the abstains to the
&quot;No&quot; total.<br><br>
Using such a system, we might decrease View 1 and View 2 by 3
each:<br><br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with view 1&nbsp; 23+1+1-3=22<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with view 2&nbsp; 7+1+1-3=6<br>
<s>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Abstain&nbsp; 3<br><br>
</s>Enough of these hypotheses.&nbsp; Here are the rest of the
data.&nbsp; Sufficient to say that View 1 (which View opposes Domain
Tasting) had a strong majority (supermajority?) over View 2 (which
favours some forms of Domain Tasting).&nbsp; The Main Motion stated that
there was no &quot;supermajority&quot; for either position.&nbsp; In my
opinion, the votes show that there is, indeed, a supermajority which
&quot;dis-favors&quot; Domain Tasting. <br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Voting Details<br><br>
Which view do you agree with?<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with view 1<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2&nbsp;
bobc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 22&nbsp;
bruce.tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 17&nbsp;
cpage@xxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 21&nbsp;
donny@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 67&nbsp;
ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 34&nbsp;
helen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 8&nbsp;
henning.grote@xxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 3&nbsp;
john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 27&nbsp; joyce@xxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 52&nbsp; legner@xxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 56&nbsp;
marcus.faure@xxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 46&nbsp;
mark.klein@xxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 7&nbsp;
mdierstein@xxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 43&nbsp;
michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 26&nbsp;
nicrelations@xxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 28&nbsp;
paulg@xxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 66&nbsp; rc@xxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 61&nbsp;
stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 19&nbsp; tim@xxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 45&nbsp; tom@xxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 54&nbsp;
tsmeets@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 64&nbsp;
violetta.nafpaktiti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 31&nbsp; yoav@xxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Total for Agree with view 1:
23</blockquote><x-tab>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</x-tab>Plus
registry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
<x-tab>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</x-tab>Adjusted
total view
1:<x-tab>&nbsp;&nbsp;</x-tab>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 24<br>
<x-tab>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</x-tab><br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with
view 2<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 38&nbsp;
adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 23&nbsp;
bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 39&nbsp;
jcvignes@xxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 65&nbsp;
moshef@xxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 44&nbsp; russ@xxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 42&nbsp;
seth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1&nbsp;
tbarrett@xxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Total for Agree with view 2:
7</blockquote><x-tab>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</x-tab>Plus
masonc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
<x-tab>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</x-tab>Adjusted
total view 2:<x-tab>&nbsp;&nbsp;</x-tab>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
8<br><br>
<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Agree with
both views<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 20&nbsp; as@xxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 62&nbsp;
henrik.erkkonen@xxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 11&nbsp;
hinojosa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 37&nbsp;
tmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Total for Agree with both
views: 4<br><br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Do not agree with either view<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 25&nbsp; bill@xxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 53&nbsp; jleg@xxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 60&nbsp;
paul.stahura@xxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Total for Do not agree with
either view: 3<br><br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Abstain<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4&nbsp;
jeckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 16&nbsp;
jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 10&nbsp;
rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Total for Abstain:
3</blockquote></body>
</html>
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>