Nominations seem to be open and we have discussed that any PAB officer
could be a POC observer. i will second your motion and put both
on for POC observers.
IMHO, anyone running for a PAB office should be able to be a POC
observer.
Since it seems that the PAB will be election more folks to the
POC I don't see why the Observers should be voting.... but we
have many moons do discuss that issue.
-Rick
On Mon, 8 Dec 1997, Amadeu Abril i Abril wrote:
> Hi PAB,
>
> I would like making a couple of (last minute?) nominations for POC Observers
> (to metamorphose in members, I suppose).
>
> My nominees are Kent Crispin and Dan Busarow. You should all know them by now.
>
> They are both already nominated for a PAB office (respectively Chair and
> Deptuty-Chair). Our rules do not prevent PAB "regular" officers to double as
> POC Observers.
>
> I believe that under the current situation and given POC and PAB top
> priorities for the coming months they are suitable candidates. POC reform,
> which is related corrollairies of gTLD-MoU amendment and PAB Charter reform
> (if we get one before...) is one of the top priorities. Having Chair and/or
> Deputy Chair seating in POC is a "must" (at least in this transition al
> period; when the time will come to implement the reform the situation may be
> completely different).
>
> The second task "this process" will be in charge of will be the SRS
> implementation, evaluation and oversight. Here POC will need the skills of
> people that had always believd in shared registries, that fully understand how
> this work and that had always advanced technical (and policy) solutions. This
> is also a matter for PAB to advise on. And both Kent and Dan meet the profile.
>
> Indeed they are free to accept running for both offices or run for only one.
> And PABers will be free to consider whether they want this cumulation of
> offices, or to choose who is most suitable for each job. But I encourage both
> to accept and PABers to seriously consider them as PAB Observers as well.
>
> Amadeu
>