Re: [ga] Point of Order

[Ken Stubbs <kstubbs@digitel.net>]

please explain why this is not a legitimate point of order here..
is it because you dont like mr walsh  ?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sotiris Sotiropoulos" <sotiris@worldatlarge.org>
To: <ga@dnso.org>
Cc: "Thomas Roessler" <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 11:18 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] Point of Order


> This is not a legitimate point of order, this is censorship and William 
> Walsh is not in any position to dictate to the GA what is or is not a 
> legitimate topic/issue for its deliberations, considerations and/or 
> votes.   Mr. Walsh's track record as a usurper of individual user 
> intiatives and grassroots organization is clear to all who are familiar 
> with his shenanigans.  Thw quote Mr. Wlash produces is not in any way 
> explicitly binding on the discussion of the GA, nor upon the subject of 
> its votes.  In fact, there is nowhere in the bylaws any restriction 
> whatsoever upon what may or may not be discussed in the GA.  I object to 
> Mr. Walsh's objections as they are nothing more than an attempt at 
> censorship.  
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> 
> William X Walsh wrote:
> 
> >I call on the Chair to table the motion by Jamie Love and others.
> >
> >The motion is illegitimate as it runs contrary to the ICANN bylaws
> >pertaining to the GA. The GA is a open forum "for participation in the
> >work of the DNSO. The participants in the GA should be individuals who
> >have a knowledge of and an interest in issues pertaining to the areas
> >for which the DNSO has primary responsibility".
> >
> >Calling for a rebid of the ICANN contract supercedes the grant of power
> >allowed in the bylaws as it extends beyond the work of the DNSO into
> >areas that also concern the PSO and ASO.
> >
> >Thus the motion as it stands is outside of the area of responsibility
> >of the DNSO GA, which is restricted by charter to only offering
> >consensus recommendations relating to the areas which are under the
> >DNSO's responsibility.  This motion is clearly beyond the scope of the
> >DNSO GA's charter, and the chair would himself be in violation of the
> >charter of the DNSO and the GA if he were to treat this as a valid
> >issue before the DNSO GA itself.
> >
> >Discussion on the broader subject matter is not forbidden, but the
> >DNSO GA itself cannot take actions which exceed its charter granted
> >mandate, and the chair must be limited in his actions by the charter
> >as well.
> >
> 
> 
> --
> 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