[ncdnhc-discuss] CPTech statement on GA rebid vote

[Adam Peake]

Jamie

But what did the vote achieve?

Did we enjoy the opportunity to have an interesting and informed 
discussion before the vote was taken?  I don't think we even know 
know what the GA membership means by "re-bid"?

I fail to see how it was "important", I would define important as 
something that might have an impact: the vote on motion 1 won't. 
Sure, it is interesting, but really it was nothing more than a straw 
poll.

I got the impression that Thomas wanted to have debate to try and 
make the vote a little more meaningful.  Shame you didn't let him.

Thanks,

Adam


At 7:40 AM -0400 5/24/02, James Love wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Thomas Roessler" <roessler at does-not-exist.org>
>To: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>; <random-bits at lists.essential.org>
>Cc: "NCDNHC-discuss list" <discuss at icann-ncc.org>
>Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 5:50 AM
>Subject: Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] CPTech statement on GA rebid vote
>
>
>: Note the numbers: There were MORE yes votes, and LESS no votes for
>: motion 2.  How does that make "Motion 1" the "more important" one?
>
>    Thomas.  In my opinion, Motion 1 was both more controversial and more
>important.  A direct request from the GA to rebid the contract is a dramatic
>rejection of the ICANN reform process.  You recognized this and campaigned
>very aggressively against having a vote on Motion 1 for exactly that reason.
>You argued time and time against that Motion 1 would destroy the GA.  What
>is the basis now for saying it wasn't important?   I could get a 100 percent
>vote that May 24, 2002  falls on a Friday,  which is something that everyone
>could agree upon,  but it would not be particularly important.     How do
>you define "important"?
>
>   Jamie
>
>PS... I'm glad that motion 2 also passed.  I voted for it too.  It says
>almost the same thing as Motion 2, but it isn't as blunt.  Motion 2 also
>left out also provison on the need to protect "innovation, competition and
>freedom."  Does that mean these are not important values, because Motion 2
>had the higher vote total?  Or just that some people don't think they are as
>important as others do?   Motion 1 was a strong statement, and it received a
>very large majority.  That was important to us, and I think it will be
>important to others also.
>
>
>--------------------------------
>James Love mailto:james.love at cptech.org
>http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at icann-ncc.org
>http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss