[wg-review] Preliminary Reports - 3. Constituencies and 4. GA

[Greg Burton <sidna@feedwriter.com>]

Preliminary Reports - 3. Constituencies and 4. GA

This is a preliminary report, and has not been reviewed by the membership
before submission. While the poll material is public and reflects as much
objectivity as possible, the opinions and conclusions drawn are the views
of the author, and cannot be called "the results of the group" until the
group has discussed and ratified them and any changes that may be
incorporated.

Material comes from group discussions and several polls run through
pollcat.com, and through a voting booth  designed for more secure results.

Unfortunately, this report has severely hampered by by network problems, 
for which I apologize. A more complete version of this report will be 
forwarded directly to the TF on the 16th.

Constituencies - Core Issue
The core problem for many members of this WG is the issue of constituencies 
and representation. Substantial discussion has occurred on the topic of 
appropriate models for both group cohesion and selection of Names Council 
positions. Current results are unclear. On the "Domain Name Definition" 
Poll, responses to the question at present appear to be

Abolished = 17
Retained = 3
Don't Know = 3
Other = 3

Whereas, when asked in the constituency poll "Is a constituency structure a 
functional method for subgrouping in the DNSO?" the answers are

Yes = 14
No = 11
Don't Know = 7

Additionally, when asked "Does the current constituency structure impact 
the effectiveness of the DNSO and NC?" 26 respondents felt it impacted the 
effectiveness negatively, while only 2 believed it effected it positively. 
To a question on "should the constituencies be reformulated" 5 disagreed, 
while 22 believed they should be reformulated in some way.

This seems to indicate that the question needs a good bit more 
consideration, but based on this result it would tentatively appear that no 
consensus exists within this WG for the continuance of the current 
constituency structure. Indeed, a substantial majority of the responding WG 
members seem to favor some form of change. Currently questions are being 
reframed for a formal vote in the more secure voting booth environment.

General Assembly - Core Issues
Of 13 respondents to the question "Is the function of the GA properly 
defined" 12 said "no" and one didn't know. Clearly the definition of the GA 
and it's tasks needs to be seriously addressed.

To the question "Should the GA be represented in the NC" 10 replied 
affirmitively, and one disagreed. To the question " If changes are made in 
the constituency structures, should the GA continue to exist?" there were 
11 in agreement, and no opposition. Though this would appear to be a 
consensus, the question was not cast in consensus form and is being 
reported as an 11-0 majority.

Because of the closely-tied nature of these issues, the amended report will 
continue to treat constituencies and the general assembly together.

Greg Burton









--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html