Re: [ga] Dan Steinberg - Watchdog?

[Eric Dierker <eric@HI-TEK.COM>]

Friends,

I just had a fun walk through our data park.  Mr. Steinberg is not registered to
vote in our registry.  Just how is he a member of the GA?  Or is he and if so
why?

Let us see; I have not seen him in a wg lately, I just checked a couple of
constituency data bases and did not find him.  He is a lawyer but for who?  I
could not check the IP constituency?

Other than apathy and the personally laudatory comments from but a few and Ken
Stubbs nomination of this man and the fact that four of us were banned during
this period and the GA had it's lowest participation rate going on does anyone
find this odd?

signed,
Paranoid

Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Sotiris,
>
> >
> >I just want to inform any newbies who don't already know, that Dan
> >Steinberg
> >(Open Root Server Confederation; Canada) was one of the members of the
> >Membership Advisory Committee (“MAC”) back in 1999 that "recommended that
> >the
> >election of At Large Directors be undertaken in at least two tranches
> >[portions], so that the experience of the first effort could be used to
> >adjust
> >the process for the remaining elections to the extent necessary to increase
> >the odds of a broadly representative electorate."
> >
> >I wonder how truly representative of the GA's sentiments Mr. Steinberg will
> >be
> >with respect to the UDRP? I hope we'll hear from him now and then...
>
> Incidentally, the idea of having the AtLarge elections split in two parts
> did then (1999) have some kind of support, within and outside the MAC. But
> the general assumption was that the two elections were to be hold within a
> reasonable amount of time, not to be pushed so far in the future as it
> currently is.
>
> Anyway, back to the main point (is Dan likely to represent the GA) there is
> a difference in the two cases: for the MAC, he was operating as an
> individual, while for the UDRP, he shall present the views of the GA (if
> there are any).
> I know Dan personally, and as I stated already in another message to the
> list, we mostly disagree on specific issues but I trust him to present the
> views of the GA rather than his own agenda. I don't know the other two
> candidates, and therefore I could not make the same statement for them.
> This said, I find worrisome that the interaction between Dan and GA is
> virtually non-existent at this point in time. This is why, even with all my
> trust for Dan, I did not feel like voting.
>
> The key here is that the GA shall get some consensus points, that Dan should
> bring forward. Obviously, if the GA does not express any consensus point,
> Dan will be free to present his own point of view in the committee.
> The same, of course, will apply for the DNSO Review, where I have the
> pleasure and honour to represent the GA. But I will post a message on this
> in the next 48H.
>
> Regards
> Roberto
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html