[ncdnhc-discuss] FYI

[Dave Crocker]

At 10:53 AM 11/26/2001 +0900, Chun Eung Hwi wrote:
> > Really?  I'm sorry but you just invented that mechanism.  It has never 
> been
> > documented or stated.
> >
> > And therein lies a very clear problem.  Different people have different
> > ideas about correct procedure.  The only way to make sure that policies 
> are
> > clear and that they represent the desires of the constituency is to place
> > them before the constituency for review and approval.  This has never been
> > done for this policy.
>
>Could you explain what is so serious for member organizations to withdraw
>from NCDNHC organizations when they declare to do so? Is it a policy or a
>common sense?

Eung Hwi,

An email subscription can be lost for a number of technical reasons.  It 
happens all the time, having nothing to do with the person's intention to 
unsubscribe.

Further, the process of changing from one representative to another means 
that the first representative will unsubscribe.  The rule that you are 
stating is that this will cause the organization's membership to be lost.

While you might believe there are "obvious" ways to prevent accidental loss 
of membership, at the moment those various ways are in people's 
heads.  They are not stated, so no one else can evaluate if they will work 
properly.


> > Thank you for acknowledging that we currently do not have a conflict of
> > interest policy.
>
>Yes, simply not clear! So, I am proposing to clarify the policy by
>revising Charter. Because it is enough clear to me but some others don't
>think so.

Excellent.  We agree on two things.  In addition to agreeing there is no 
current policy, we agree that it would be good to create a policy.

Our agreeing on the first point does raise some question about the efforts 
to remove voting priviledges for some members, based on claims of supposed 
conflict of interest.  However we can defer that topic until later, I think.


> > And please note that such a policy would mean that Milton's own activities
> > as a UDRP judge would disqualify him from holding an NCDNHC position...
>
>That's true. I have never said that the docmented policy could be applied
>to general members.

Oh?  I am most gratified to hear that.  Others who have been making claims 
about supposed existing conflict of interest problems have been making 
these claims only to people who are NOT officers of the constituency.

So it appears that we have a third item about which we agree.  This is 
wonderful!



>  ICANN's "conflict of interest" document would provide a
>good framework for our policy.

Oh dear.  This is dangerous.

I agree on this point, also!

d/


----------
Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464