RE: [registrars] RE: ballot games and abuse of position by Mike Palage.

["Michael D. Palage" <michael@palage.com>]

Rob,

See my previous email to Rick. Me backing Henning has nothing to do with
getting to the BOARD. Read the by-laws, they are black and white. There is
no bias. Just me believing that Henning is the better of the two candidates.

Based upon my previous decision not to seek election with the registrar
constituency I am advocating for the next group of leaders to carry the
constituency forward. Nothing more, nothing less.

Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Rob Hall
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 5:15 PM
> To: Registrars Mail List
> Subject: [registrars] RE: ballot games and abuse of position by Mike
> Palage.
>
>
> Mike,
>
> As the head of the constituency, what you have been doing is not
> acceptable.
> Our leader should not be advocating one candidate over another.  I believe
> it is an abuse of the position and totally inappropriate.
>
> Given that the person elected will be on the committee that
> selects the new
> board, and given that you have clearly stated that you wish to be one of
> those selected, and given that there are now concerns of ballot
> games being
> played by you, it raises all kinds of red flags and questions of
> ethics for
> me.  Especially given that you are on the executive and can see
> the results
> of the vote so far.  What appears to be the engineering of voting outcomes
> of this type for your own personal gain down the road is just plain wrong.
>
> I was shocked to read the email you have been sending out.  I
> post a copy of
> it here so that all may read it and evaluate your actions for themselves.
> You said in an earlier email that the low point for you was the Sydney
> meetings and your actions there.  I think you have found a new low.
>
> As the head of the constituency, I would have hoped you were
> above this.  I
> expect Henning and Elliot to be lobbying for my vote (although
> interestingly
> enough, neither has called me to extol their virtues). For them, that is
> perfectly acceptable.  For you to use your position as Chair to
> influence an
> election is reprehensible.  I trust that Henning and Elliot are both above
> these types of games.
>
> I was going to be silent on this issue until the voting was over, as I did
> not want to do anything to influence the election, but given Rick's
> concerns, I felt I should disclose what I knew for all to see and
> judge for
> themselves.
>
> It is truly a shame that after so much hard work for the constituency, you
> choose to leave us with a bad taste in our mouths.
>
> Shame on you.
>
> Rob.
>
>
> ************************************
>
> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> From: "Michael D. Palage" <michael@palage.com>
> Subject: Registrar Nominating Delegate Vote
>
> Dear xxxxxxxxx:
>
> I hope that over the years I have earned your trust as a representative
> of
> the registrar constituency. I am writing you to ask that you cast your
> ballot in favor of Henning Grote for the Registrar Nominating Delegate,
> https://www.boardrooms.org/kmembership_info/request_password/.
>
> I believe that Henning's experience with a global telecommunication
> provider
> as well as an ICANN accredited registrar will provide the registrar
> constituency with the maximum voice within the nominating committee. This
> committee will have the important responsibility of selecting half of the
> ICANN voting Board. I also believe that Henning as a European will help
> bring geographic diversity to an ICANN organization that is predominately
> North American centric. Although Elliot has been at times a vocal
> representative of the registrar constituency, I believe that Henning's
> silent diplomacy will achieve the maximum results.
>
> Should you have any comments or questions please do not hesitate to
> conntact
> me. As I will be in DC the remainder of the week, cell phone is the best
> way
> to get in contact with me 561-628-3787. Should you run into any
> complications in casting your vote via the online system, please fax you
> vote to the registrar efax account at 312-896-9022.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael D. Palage
>
> ************************************
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Michael D. Palage
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 4:31 PM
> To: Rick Wesson; Registrars Executive Committee
> Cc: Registrars List
> Subject: [registrars] RE: ballot games
>
>
> Rick:
>
> I am a little confused. I have been actively calling registrars
> telling them
> to get out and vote, while simulateously advocating Henning who I
> nominated.
> In fact, TUCOWS employees have been doing the same and even asking
> registrars to change their vote. Having registrars cast a vote is a good
> thing. Having registrars become active in the constituency by
> paying dues is
> a good thing. Since the constituency was formed we have always allowed a
> registrar to vote provided that they met the qualifications. If they said
> payment was forth coming we would wait. If the payment came their vote
> counted. Check the archieves, I am not making it up.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rick Wesson [mailto:wessorh@ar.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 4:05 PM
> > To: Registrars Executive Committee
> > Cc: Registrars List
> > Subject: ballot games
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I have received numerous requests to add registrars to the
> boardrooms.org
> > site today, and one fax with a vote on it.
> >
> > I feel we are very near to compromising the integrity of the executive
> > committee.
> >
> >   a) in the future we should only allow those to vote who are
> eligible at
> >      the time of the ballot issuance.
> >
> >   b) we shouldn't allow new processes to be initiated during a ballot
> >
> >   c) we should only allow those members in good standing to participate.
> >      we have several members who are in limbo because various payment
> >      were not received.
> >
> >   d) we should not extend the ballot period with out a clear
> justification
> >      and documentation for such. the request for extention yesterday
> >      which I originally agreed with is just one issue that makes me
> >      question the motivation.
> >
> > All of the above recommendations allow for a more predictable ballot
> > process with a greater level of integrity that we are currently working
> > under.
> >
> > In short I'm not sure of the gaming being played here, or if
> there is even
> > a game being played; but I am VERY uneasy with the undocumented process
> > surrounding this ballot and if the executive committee is working in the
> > best of the constituency any more.
> >
> >
> > -rick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>