On Sun, 30 Jan 2000, Kent Crispin wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 30, 2000 at 12:31:49PM -0500, Milton Mueller wrote:
> > In my opinion the effect of Kent's proposal is to disenfranchise the people
> > who elected the original NC member.
> >
> > The fact is, people from different geographic regions often have different
> > views on policy issues. That is why we have the geographic diversity
> > requirements!
>
> The whole purpose of the geographic diversity requirement is to foster
> participation by ALL regions, while in your perverse view the purpose
> seems to be to foster fiefdoms.
>
> The "running-mates" proposal actually locks in representation on the NC
> to the most populous regions. That is, in fact it works *against*
> genuinely diverse geographic representation. Nii's proposal, on the
> other hand, gives regions with smaller representation in the ncdnhc an
> opportunity to participate in the NC proceedings.
>
> > The GD requirements make it clear that, for example, someone from North
> > American is unlikely to be the best representative for someone from Africa,
> > and vice versa.
> >
> > Now, in Kent's proposal, if an elected NC member from North America is
> > unable to attend a meeting, the people who elected that person will be
> > represented by a person from Africa or Europe or whoever is next in line on
> > the AdCom. It is possible that the people who elected the original NC member
> > do not even know the alternate, have never met, and do not support his or
> > her views.
>
> Your view of the NC representatives, then, is that once they get
> elected they forget the rest of the NCDNHC, and merely represent their
> own region. The purpose of the ncdnhc, in your perverse view, is
> simply as a tool for the more populated regions to get representation
> on the NC.
>
> In my view all the NC reps should have a fiduciary responsibility to
> represent the ncdnhc as a whole. That is, Kathy doesn't go to the NC
> and say, "I represent the North American geographical region". She
> says instead "I represent non-commercial domain holders".
>
> The whole point of the geographical diversity requirement is to be sure
> that more populated regions don't lock in control. The "running-mates"
> proposal is designed to circumvent that intent.
>
> [...]
>
> > This seems to be to be self-evidently undesirable. An alternate is supposed
> > to be someone who stands in the place of the original NC rep and represents
> > the views of the ELECTED person they are substituted for.
>
> Nope. An alternate is supposed to represent, to the best of their
> ability, the position of the CONSTITUENCY, just as the original NC
> member is supposed to. Of course, we all have unconscious biases
> towards our regions, but we have three reps instead of one to help
> counteract that, and Nii's proposal furthers that end.
>
> > We need to think a bit more carefully about the political situation here. If
> > the Non-commercial constituency was a cohesive group of people who all knew
> > each other and shared the same basic outlook, the AdCom-method of
> > designating alternates would work. But we are not cohesive.
>
> While we are not cohesive, it seems self evident that models that foster
> cohesion are better than models that foster factionalization.
>
> [...]
>
> > Very well. If you want to preserve geographic representation on the NC, then
> > you must vote for alternate method #1, which allows a geographical NC
> > representative to select an alternate that supports their own views.
>
> What a bizarre bit of doubletalk: Support diverse representation by
> supporting a system that locks in the representatives of a single
> region.
>
> --
> Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
> kent@songbird.com lonesome." -- Mark Twain
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: vandrome@renater.fr
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ncdnhc-discuss-2019V@lyris.isoc.org
>
-
In Kent's view, there is a strong confusion between the fair representation
of all constituency components (the election of the AdCom and the NC
members is taylored for that) and a more operational aspect, which is to
allow some NC members to have an alternate to act on behalf of them, as a
temporary substitute. Bringing the same sensitivity to designate these
temporary alternates as to formally elect the NC representatitive (for a 1
year period of time) is just out-of-proportions.
Alternate means that it could happen that they could be asked to act
as.... Not more!
In that case, it is worthwhile that titular and alternate know each other
and can share views and exchange about problems....
Dany
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dany VANDROMME | Directeur du GIP RENATER
Reseau National de Telecommunications
pour la Technologie, l'Enseignement et la Recherche
| ENSAM
Tel : +33 (0)1 53 94 20 30 | 151 Boulevard de l'Hopital
Fax : +33 (0)1 53 94 20 31 | 75013 Paris
E-mail: Dany.Vandromme@renater.fr | FRANCE
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 09 2000 - 13:20:37 PDT