[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [council] Chait-Acting Chair-Current ChairNo chair
I believe we should commend Dennis for taking the time to try to help
run a smooth show (and I think he has done a very good job to date) and
don't really care what we call him (Big Kahuna?). I also admire his
thoughtful consideration of his nomination to the ICANN Board and
decision to decline the nomination and commit himself to the Names
Council. I am grateful that someone has stepped up to the plate, but of
course if others feel they wish to "chair" a meeting, I believe we
should allow them to do so. I was just under the impression there was
not a huge waiting list.
From: Amadeu Abril i Abril [mailto:Amadeu@nominalia.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 12:30 PM
Subject: [council] Chait-Acting Chair-Current ChairNo chair
> At 13:15 29/09/99 +0100, Dennis Jennings wrote:
> >As your (current) Chair, ...
> The NC has no Chair (current or otherwise) .
> As a matter of fact, and to avoid this sort of confusion, I would like
> request that the next meeting be chaired by somebody else from another
> constituency, rotating the chair, as we have been doing in the past.
Let me disagree this time. Perhaps I am at the orign of the confusion.
I was the one pusghin really hard to have someonbe chairing "periods"
not only "telconferences". And to have some continuity inthat role. I
am sure that the preious situation where each teleconf had a differnt
chair (someitn¡mes without his(her prior knowledge) and no one was ·in
charge of the administraiton·, ie, in charge of moving forard the
agfenda and the remaining open issues, was the most important reason,
for the less than succcessful role of the NC in the immediate past
(with Snatiago as the clearest proff). This, and the lack of personal
commitemnt form some members, indeed.
I have forced the isutation in Santiago in the sense that Dennis
accepted to be the chari for all incoming teleconferences up to LA,
where Jonahtan has already been apoointed to be the chair.
My interpretation, and this is waht I have been communicating to
Dennis in private mails, is that he has the duty to act alos as "the
voice of the agenda/pending work" between telecnferences. Taul and I
spent ots of times discussing the meaning of NC reolutions. The best
way to get to a conclusion is have the Chair of that teleconf(meeting
"set the facts· (he could proof worng in his/her assumptionsm but that
is another question,.,,,(,
This is whym as U saudm I hgave pusshed Dennis, in public and
private,m to take waht I think are his responsibiliites. Actring as
·acting chair" unti lLA. Indeed, he is not the apponted, offical, full
chair. Just acting as such in default of an appoitned one.
For the record, i also tried to convince the NC to elect a real chari
for the same reasons, but the argument that the pNCshgould refrain
form doing that and let that job to the permanent NC (even with lots
of provisional members there.....) was shared among most of us. In the
meanwhile, we need someone to keep the ball rolling, and I am
perfeclty happy with Dennis doing that.
OTOG, let me state form now on, as I said in Santiago that I oppose
the idea of a rotating chair among the consituencies. +If we need a
chair we elct one (as I think we should) based on hi(her capaciites
and our preferences. Then we rotate among consituencies for co-chairng
public meetings, so evryubody has his(her slice of glory, if so needed.
As an aside, as I altready told to you both, many among us would be
fvary gratefull if both of you wer not that eager to jump into
eachibes0s throuat when theother sends one, any e-mail ;-))
Amadeu, jsut going yo watch jow Barça beats Arsenal.