Antony Van Couvering wrote:
>Amadeu,
>Vote early, vote often.
>I don't like this idea. I could join up many hundreds of people to the
>gTLD-MoU (my accountant, my lawyer, my pizza delivery company) and vote on
>their behalf.
>
>Of course, we don't have a charter, so I suppose you can do whatever you
>can get away with.
>Antony
>
Amadeu wrote:
>>(Summary: I represent different companies in PAB. More concretely I am the
>PAB
>>rep of two companies that are completely separate. May I vote for both?}
AFAIK, PAB is *not* a body of individuals, but rather one of
oganisations/companies.
In that context, each org/co can decide on their own who they actually want
to put
up as spokesperson. If a single person actually manages to get delegated
the vote of
a few different companies, then why shouldn't that person vote for each and
every one
of those organisations. Whether or not to concentrate their votes into a
single person
is a matter for individual org's/co's to decide for.
And Antony, if you could get hundreds of co's/org's (not people) to sign
the gTLD-MoU
and then join the PAB, then why haven't you yet done so? Wasn't it one of
the objectives
of the chairperson in the "pre-charter" (or whatever)?
(...)
>>I use this long explanation for two purposes: first, to underline once more
>>the near impossibility to define rules excluding “CORE members” from PAB
>>representation. I’m in CORE while not being a registrar. I represent a
>>registrar AND a company that has nothing to do with such registrar.... Good
>>sense, more than rules should sort out this problem (even if I agree with
the
>>principle of avoiding cross-representation and I’m a little bit conxcerned
>>about how this is being treated in this concrete electoral process).
I've come around to believe that if something can't be policed/enforced,
then it should
not be legislated. I see no reasonable way to define the fuzzy limit of
"when is a person
a member of CORE or not?" It's (relatively) easy to see where somebody is
when they are
a clear cut case. For example, Ivan as the CEO of a CORE company can
certainly be
classified as a CORE-person, and me as the technical director of
AIS-SYSTEL, which has
*no* ties to any company in CORE, I'm certainly not CORE. But those are
just extremes.
It gets fun in the middle. Black is black, white is white, but when is grey
light enough
to write of as white, or dark enough to group with black?
Is Rick Wesson, who runs (still?) the CORE mailing list, and apparently
participates in
it, and has written out software specifications etc... sufficiently tinted
with CORE so
as to rule him out of being a PAB officer (yes, I know he's not running).
Is Amadeu,
who is heavily involved in CORE to such an extent that he's been (I think)
nominated as
a CORE rep to POC, despite not being part of any registrar still non-CORE
enough? And the
list goes on. In the end we're nearly talking about censorship. Are we
going to go diving
into "political cleansing" or something? Is it not much better to allow
anyone to nominate
ANYONE to a PAB position? After all, I think we don't have a rule that the
nominee has
to be a member of PAB, so that means that the whole world population can be
nominated as
a PAB rep.... except if you are a CORE person??? Doesn't make sense to me
how to enforce
it. It DOES however make sense to me to allow each co/org to vote as they
want, as long
as the candidate has openly stated his own affiliations, which also brings
out of course
that there has to be a possibility of impeachment, should the declaration
turn out to be
not as clean as the membership would have desired.
Yours, John Broomfield.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:15 PST