[ga] Re: Motion for a vote of no confidence in the Board
Mike Roberts writes: "The direct election option is gone."
It doesn't matter that after a year-long study the ALSC still supported
direct elections, that NAIS supported direct elections, that Public Forum
participants supported direct elections, that the GA, NCDNHC,BC, gTLDs
supported direct elections... the only thing that matters to Mike is that we
resign ourselves to acceptance of the verdict of the Board to eliminate
Why should we?
If this Board is incapable of recognizing broad consensus, then why we should
we bother to participate in any schemes to retain these incumbents? Did the
Board recognize the consensus on the VeriSign renegotiations? Did the Board
respect the consensus on dot org? Of course not, and rather than abiding by
the rules "as they are required to do" and remanding policy recommendations
back to the originating SO's for further work if so required, they instead
arbitrarily and capriciously crafted their own resolutions at odds with the
community will. This has become an ugly pattern.
There are no checks on the power of this Board-run-amok. Until such checks
are in place, why should we choose to cooperate? Any consensus that we reach
is guaranteed to be overturned by the Board with no right of appeal other
than to the same smug insiders that sit on the reconsideration committee.
If you expect us to "get to work", give us first an Independent Review Board.
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html