[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [wg-b] Voting Update & Question Forumlation

At 11:45 01.10.99 -0400, Michael D. Palage wrote:

>I agree that the formulation of certain questions is crucial. In this case
>however, I believe that a thumbs up or thumbs down approval was the best
>option.  I believe the lawyers participating in this list, myself included,
>are well adept in viewing issues in every shade of gray possible. I believe
>the discussions on the list to date are amble proof that there is a lot of
>gray to deal with - but sometimes a yes or no answer is the best indicator
>of consensus or the lack thereof.

In this case, I agree with you that getting the question out is probably 
better than having the meta-discussion on the formulation of the questions.
In later votes, I'd appreciate having the suggested list of options for the 
vote be presented to the list a week or so ahead of the commencement of the 
vote, with the chair being empowered to change the formulations and options 
according to what the group thinks.

>With regard to the Votebot:
>I am not inventing a Votebot. I am taking the existing one that CORE has
>used and putting it on DNSO's boxes. Could you image the conspiracy
>arguments if substantive issues were being conducted outside the scope of
>DNSO oversight. The delays have been that the DNSO people similar to
>Elizabeth and myself have full-time jobs. ICANN related works as co-chair
>and secretariat of the registrar constituency already consumes an inordinate
>amount of my time. There are only 24 hours in the day and my 10 week old son
>needs to know that he has a father :)

OK - I hadn't heard the identity of the software used before.

Give my regards to your family - they only have you, the Internet has all 
of us.....


Harald Tveit Alvestrand, Maxware, Norway