Re: [wg-review] 11. IDNH

["Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M." <rod@cyberspaces.org>]

I think question #4 needs some work before a poll is taken. I am not sure
what the purpose a Names Council will serve in the absence of
constituencies. If you vote to support abolition of  the constituencies, it
seems to me that the NC must go too; otherwise, you have a structure that is
worse, not better, than the status quo. It seems a bit silly to vote to get
rid of a structure without careful thinking about what should replace it.
Are we polling too quickly?

Rod

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bret Busby" <bret@clearsol.iinet.net.au>
To: "Joop Teernstra" <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>
Cc: <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>; <wg-review@dnso.org>; <gusion@gusion.com>;
"YJ Park (MINC)" <yjpark@minc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 2:45 AM
Subject: Re: [wg-review] 11. IDNH


> Joop Teernstra wrote:
> >
> > On 14:16 15/01/01 -0500, Sotiropoulos said:
> > >1/15/01 10:05:12 AM, Greg Burton <sidna@feedwriter.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>It seems clear that there is widespread - almost consensus - support
for us
> > >>to recommend a constituency of some kind here.
> > >
> > >Actually Greg, I'd say that there was more widespread support for the
> > dissolution of the constitency structure.  In fact it appears to be a
> > majority, check it
> > >out: http://pollcat.com/Lite/report.asp?report=report/tzk27voon5_a
> > >
> >
> > This is an important point. Important enough for a more formal poll.
> > With permission of the Chair, I will put up four more polling questions
in
> > the Booth:
> >
> > 1. Should in your opinion the constituency structure of the DNSO be
> > abandoned altogether?
> >  Yes/No/ No opinion
> >
> > 2. If the Constituency structure is retained, do you favour the addition
of
> > an Individual DN Holder constituency?
> > YES/NO
> >
> > 3. If the  Constituency structure is retained, do you favour  a
reduction
> > of NC seats belonging to the existing constituencies and redistribution
of
> > seats in order to more evenly balance opposing interests?
> > YES/NO/ other (please specify)
> >
> > 4. If the Constituency structure is abandoned, how would you want to
> > represent the Individual Domain Name holders on the Names Council?
> >
> > -not at all
> > -turn the GA into an electoral college for the NC
> > -other: please specify on the comment line
> > (multiple choice possible)
> >
> > --Joop--
> > www.idno.org
>
> Before another poll is called (if it hasn't, already), could I have the
> status and role of the constituencies clarified, please?
>
> I understand, from what has been said, that the existence of the
> constituencies is a necessary evil; that, without the constituencies, no
> advocacy to the Names Council would exist; that the Names Council
> members are appointed, without the constituencies, and, that removing
> the constituencies, would ensure that an appointed board would be what
> constituted the Names Council, with no-one being represented, other than
> the body that appointed the NC board.
>
> So, can I please have this all clarified, by someone on this list, who
> knows; the current structure, and, the effect of exterminating the
> constituencies?
>
> I assume that the one named YJ (?), would be the one best qualified to
> answer this.
>
> Thanks in anticipation.
>
> --
>
> Bret Busby
>
> Armadale, West Australia
>
> ......................................
> "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the
> answer means."
>  - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
>  - Douglas Adams, 1988
> ......................................
> --
> 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
>
>

--
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