Re: [ga] Motion to Condemn the Propsed "theft" of the .BIZ tldbyICANN
Joanna Lane wrote:
> on 6/24/01 7:45 PM, William S. Lovell at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> First, I'm reassured to find my name in the middle of your list, which is
> exactly the ground I wish to claim. Second, I would hardly call getting a
> calendar out, to pencil in a few key dates next to a task list, as
> "inventing a new procedure", or forgetting rules of democratic processes.
Way to go Joanna! I've said that a procedure exists; you say that all you
want to do is "timeline" it. That's progress, and from past experience
precisely what I would have expected from you.
> >I don't get up every morning
> > and re-instruct myself on how to walk, how to breathe, or what
> > I'm supposed to do in the bathroom.
> Yes, but if you do not check your priorities and adjust your schedule, we
> could say that you fly your business by the seat of your pants.
The missing element here is that the decision on what now rises to the
surface and has become worthy of a motion is made not by the
proponents, but by the Chair. It is the ad hoc generation of multiple
motions with various numbers of seconds that creates the chaos. It
is then loudly complained that "the Chair didn't act," when in fact all
that's on the table is a bunch of competing schemes on whatever, with
no discussion at all. What's needed in your timeline is a set of criteria
that will define what is "motion worthy" and what is not. I cannot
imagine a Chair, having seen an issue thoroughly discussed, not then
asking for a motion, draft one him/herself as a suggestion, or whatever,
so as to get to the next part of the DNSO procedure.
> What is being originated on the ga-rules list is simply a template document
> for good business practice to improve operations and save time. It's not a
> change of policy or a matter related to democratic traditions.
Ordinary democratic traditions do no include a shotgun scatter of scatter-
brained notions all vying for position (as motions) at once. Proponent
of scheme X endeavors to rush "motion" X to a vote as soon as possible,
which is not a democratic process but rather a scam. The recognition of
a "worthy motion" is not time-defined, however, but rather to be defined
by its content and the opportunity that has been available to chew over
its pros and cons.
> Get with the plan Bill!
Isn't that what we're doing? :-)
Any terms or acronyms above that are not familiar
to the reader may possibly be explained at:
"WHAT IS": http://whatis.techtarget.com/
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html