[wg-review] [IDNH] Poll results on setting up a dedicated WG for an IDNH constituency

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

http://www.democracy.org.nz/vote1/cfm/results.cfm?TID=185

Setting up a dedicated WG for discussing structure and functioning of an IDNH
constituency?

Total number of voters: 22

Don’t support              2                            9.0909%
Other (please use comment line)    5         22.7273%
Support                                      15         68.1818%

Comments: 
·       this WG , if it adopts a Charter would actually become the
constituency
itself 
·       I would like to see working groups for not only this but to look at
the
structure and implementation of all the constituencies. 
·       do not support constituency structure - but will go along grudgingly
with an individuals constituency in absence of eliminating the constituencies
altogether. 
·       support once removed the insults to the @large 
·       stop delaying 
·       The @Large, as a registry and un-organized voter pool is of value in
it's own right. I have no problem with the status quo reflected in points 1
2 &
3 under @Large heading, provided that @Large votes impact may ICANN
substantively. 
·       Simply instruct the NC to tell the Board to create a constituency for
Individuals - a working group on the subject will just end up being another
morass and add more delay. 
·       STRONGLY SUPPORT AND URGE IMMEDIATE ACTION 





--Joop--
www.idno.org

--
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