Re: [ncc-charter] charter amendment - non-voting members?

From: Adam Peake (
Date: Fri Sep 01 2000 - 04:45:52 PDT

  • Next message: Milton Mueller: "Re: [ncc-charter] charter amendment - non-voting members?"

    >----- Original Message -----
    >From: "Adam Peake" <>
    >> I think we need to say what non-voting membership means.
    >We need to eliminate that language. Substitute "non-voting participants."
    >They are not members.

    I don't understand what you're saying here.
    We've always had a class of non-voting members, they have always had
    certain rights (though not very well defined rights) within the
    constituency. You think they should be ineligible for membership, period?

    >> Current charter text says:
    >> *Non-voting members can participate in the discussion list, submit
    >> *proposals to the Constituency and participate in all open
    >> *teleconference calls and physical meetings.
    >That is too much. No other constituency allows non-members to participate in
    >their Adcom meetings. You could reduce membership to meaninglessness if
    >teleconferences (which are difficult enough to communicate in as it is) can
    >be attended with full participation of non-members.

    OK, not participate in Adcom teleconference calls.
    So will you accept: non-voting members may propose and vote on resolutions
    and discuss and propose amendments to resolutions during face to face
    meetings and on the mailing list?

    Note. We created this non-voting class of members for organizations that
    are voting members of other constituencies (usually CC-TLD operators) and
    subgroups of organizations that are already members of the constituency
    (ISOC chapters.) They are organizations that would qualify for membership
    if it weren't for these conflicts.

    I agree that they should be non-voting in the election of our Adcom
    representatives, but for the work of the constituency I think this class of
    members should be able to participate as fully as possible (Milton, I am
    willing to give on them not participating in teleconference calls.)

    As I mentioned yesterday, our decision may have implications for
    organizations applying for the travel grant and for the grant itself
    (applicants must be "a member of the Non-Commercial Domain Name Holders
    Constituency" <>.) And we
    should be careful not to fall foul of Section 3a of ICANN bylaws,

       Each Constituency shall self-organize, and shall determine its own
    criteria for
       participation, except that no individual or entity shall be excluded
    from participation in a
       Constituency merely because of participation in another Constituency, and
       constituencies shall operate to the maximum extent feasible in an open and
       transparent manner and consistent with procedures designed to ensure

    Please, some opinions on this from others. It should be decided before the
    November ICANN meeting, so let's try and agree on something now.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 01 2000 - 04:49:29 PDT