RE: [registrars] Request to Deny Multiple Votes/Registrar

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@godaddy.com>]

I believe I did formulate one. Let me restate it again:

I propose that we amend 4.5.1.3 to read:

"Members shall have one vote. Only Members in good standing shall have
voting rights."

 Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org] On
Behalf Of Elana Broitman
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 1:28 PM
To: ross@tucows.com; Registrars Mail List
Cc: Registrars Executive Committee
Subject: RE: [registrars] Request to Deny Multiple Votes/Registrar

it clearly can't be a "friendly amendment" because it's directly
opposite the language in the bylaws.  that being said, let's have a vote
on the amendment, if someone would like to formulate one.

-----Original Message-----
From: ross@tucows.com 
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 2:20 PM
To: 'Registrars Mail List'
Cc: 'Registrars Executive Committee'
Subject: [registrars] Request to Deny Multiple Votes/Registrar



>> I'd like to see 1 vote per registrar, no matter  who owns them.


...and I would like to see anything *but* this.

Must we take another kick at this can?

The constituency has visited this issue many, many, many times in the
past. Each time it happens, we see those that hold multiple
accreditations push for multiple votes. And each time, we see the
proposal defeated.

We just went through this just over a year ago so let me restate what I
said back then;

***Tucows strenuously opposes any proposal that provides any entity with
additional voting rights for any reason. Having a vibrant,
representative constituency precludes any bylaw amendment that would
provide Register.com, GoDaddy and Network Solutions with an estimated 10
votes between the three of them. Adopting this very serious amendment
will have the net effect of substantially disadvantaging the majority of
registrars. Faced with such a strong political disadvantage would likely
lead Tucows to seek additional accreditations in order to level the
playing field. An "accreditation race" of this nature benefits no one.
It is an appropriate and unfair way to run our constituency.

Here's a refresher from the last time that we had this discussion
(Palage, February 21, 2002):

"As was originally voted upon last year and reaffirmed in the vote taken
at the start of the Dulles meeting, the spirit of original by-laws
remains, one vote per registrar parent company, regardless of the number
of its subsidiaries or accreditations it may acquire through the
continued consolidation occurring within the industry."

My formal request is that the executive committee deny any move to amend
this important element of the constituencies fundamental composition. 


                       -rwr




"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- Steven Wright

Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/