[ncdnhc-discuss] Resolution on ORG Divestiture

[Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales]

Hi Dave, Milton and all:

And, of course, I really would like to hold votation online right now or
before MdR meeting 
on the issues I am addressing in the recent proposal of voting on First
View document and Draft Statement  of Policy on .ORG Divesture.

I am sure that NCDNHC charter doesn't limit votations to f2f meetings be
first, since this procedure was created with the spirit to 
provide initial inputs to be provided to the Names Council and/or ICANN
Board.  

However, it is important to run votations before f2f meeting
when time and/or circumstances makes that an Official Position should be
developed before f2f meetings, or when Names Council wants to vote
online on subjects addressed there, or when there are public comments on
documents produced by Task Forces, etc.

Thank you Dave.

Best Regards
Vany



Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
> At 04:35 PM 10/26/2001, Milton Mueller wrote:
> >It looks to me like we agree fundamentally on what
> >to do. You want to have a partitioned vote on the
> >ORG proposition. We will. There is a resolution on ORG
> >for the MdR meeting. At the meeting, you can
> >propose to vote on it paragraph by paragraph.
> 
> And the reason this cannot be pursued NOW and ONLINE is what, exactly?
> 
> >Then we can have a discussion of those different
> >parts, and put together a final position. This is
> >easier and better to do f2f.
> 
> Easier, perhaps.  Better?  To make a point of excluding members of ncdnhc
> unable to attend MdR?  Probably not.
> 
> >Then, for those members who cannot attend
> >the meeting, we have our standard procedure
> >of further discussing and voting on the
> >resolution online.
> 
> Ahh, I see.  Exclude people for the initial discussion, then develop a
> false appearance of consensus, so that it will be much more difficult for
> serious discussion and modification online.
> 
> Ok.  Thanks for the clarification.
> 
> >That is the agreed way to formulate a
> >position that the whole constituency supports.
> 
> I keep asking where it is documented that things may be done on the list
> only AFTER a meeting.  One of these days, someone will need to provide that
> documentation, since it being used as the fundamental basis for -- to all
> effects -- disenfranchising people unable to attend meetings.
> 
> >Is there anything wrong with this method?
> 
> See above.
> 
> d/
> 
> ----------
> Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
> Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
> tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464

-- 
Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales
Information Technology Specialist
Sustainable Development Networking Programme/Panama
Tel: (507) 317-0169
http://www.sdnp.org.pa
e-mail:  vany at sdnp.org.pa