[ga] Re: Suspension of Voting Rights
Anger is precisely the correct emotion to be displayed when the voting
rights of the membership are threatened. That you would seek to change the
bylaws to allow for this pernicious disenfranchisement is a serious cause
for concern. Perhaps the trouble stems from the fact that the Names Council
has relied on small committees that fail to gather input from the broader
membership. Our membership may have been able to provide options other
than those which your peers have decided upon (maybe an additional 3 cents
remitted on each domain name registration to cover the administrative and
operational costs of the DNSO).
We appreciate the fact that your organization has committed $100,000 in
matching funds to the DNSO (put on the table 10 August last year
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-budget/Arc00/msg00004.html ), but
understand that this offer, which has still not been sufficiently publicized
by the NC, is a one-time event that may not be repeated - this only
compounding the problem for next year's budget which will not have recourse
to such largesse. This means even higher costs down the road for
constituencies that are having a hard time of it already, and of course an
increased probability that they will be denied their votes.
I am similarly appreciative of the fact that you seek "more credibility to
DNSO recommendations", but I believe that credibility is best afforded by a
Council replete with voting members, not just with members that can afford
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html