[ncdnhc-discuss] [Suggestion] "Proxy"

[YJ Park]

Dear Norbert,

> can you please elaborate your proposal - how would it work, or how does
> it work in other constituencies? Is it - with others constituenceis -
> strengthening their ability to act quickly during the ICANN sessions in
> terms of voting? How does it related to the on-line voting?

I am happy to clarify the issues raised here.

The "proxy" has been applied to either "F2F meeting" or "teleconference"
in other constituencies.

i.e. Proxy at the F2F meeting. ccTLD constituency in theory has more than
200 members but only 30 - 40 ccTLD managers attend the meeting in person.
The others who can't attend the ccTLD meeting can give their "proxy" to
other ccTLD managers. It is implemented either through mailing list publicly
or through ccTLD secretariat. NC also adopts proxy during its F2F meeting.

i.e. Proxy during NC teleconference. NC has 21 members but usually
less than 15. Therefore, those cannot attend the call notify in advance
either to the NC list or DNSO secretariat to whom the proxy should be
transfered.

Therefore, I here suggested "proxy" during F2F meeting where NCDNHC
may not have more than 100 members. On the other hand, sometimes
there are members around the ICANN meeting but due to their other
conflicting meetings, they cannot participate in resolution voting on the
spot.

For the clarification for our resolution voting, NCDNHC adopted two-layer
processes both F2F meeting and post-online voting.

> I am sympathetic to your proposal, as it seems to be a way to make it
> easier for the NCDNHC to react and act during ICANN meetings. In the
> past I felt ometimes that the NCDNHC was somewhat paralyzed to act
> during ICANN meetings (as those who are present cannot speak fully for
> the whole constituency), while other constituencies did not seem to have
> the same constraints.

Thank you for your understanding and let's explore how we can achieve
the most agreeable and most effective procedure for us.

YJ

> Norbert
>
>
>
>
> YJ Park wrote:
> > Dear members,
> >
> > Since NCDNHC was recognized as a constituency by ICANN Board
> > in August 1999, NCDNHC has tried to build effective working relations
> > among members through email, teleconference and f2f meeting.
> >
> > After more than three years, it is high time for NCDNHC to introduce
> > another working mechanism in addition to the existing mechanisms
> > which has turned out to be effective system in other constituency
> > especially in ccTLD constituency and NC.
> >
> > "PROXY"
> >
> > A number of members expressed they could not come to Shanghai
> > meeting due to many reasons. However, if we introduce "PROXY",
> > those who cannot be in Shanghai in person can "indirectly" attend
> > NCDNHC meeting giving their "Proxy" to other members who are
> > planning to attend.
> >
> > If this is agreeable, I would like to propose NCDNHC in Shanghai
> > shall introduce "PROXY" to its members.
> >
> > Regards,
> > YJ
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> > http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Norbert Klein
> Open Forum of Cambodia: www.forum.org.kh
>
> Support democratic control of the Internet!
> Go to http://www.icannatlarge.org and Join ICANN At Large!
>
>