Re: [wg-d] NC Elections. Was: ga] DNSO General Assembly - Revised Agenda

["Bret A. Fausett" <baf@fausett.com>]

Kent Crispin wrote:
>Therefore, the obvious thing to do is to charter a working group to 
>develop those procedures...

I think it's this one.

And if it is, the issue is "How should the DNSO's Board members be 
nominated by the General Assembly."

The possibilities so far are:

   (1) the support of one person  places you on the ballot;
 
         or

   (2) the support of more than one person (leave it at 
       that for the moment) places you on the ballot;

I've given my two cents about why I favor the latter (efficiency, 
produces candidates with proven support from the community, makes the 
nomination task a meaningful role for the GA). I also disagree with your 
conclusion, on the main GA list, that the NC could still meet certain 
minimum thresholds. For one thing, a simple rule that no GA member could 
demonstrate nomination support for more than one candidate would make 
votes more prudently exercised. 

Leaving aside the textual analysis of the phrase "Nominated by a member 
of the GA" (about which we appear to have reached reasonable but 
different conclusions), let's assume that the process is open to our 
definition here. What should it be? 

        -- Bret