Joe and all,
Nonesense Joe! If you need funds to hold an election they are readily
available. If you don't know how to go about legitimately acquiring those
funds, than give me a call... But to use this as a "Cathc-22" excuse
is frankly, pathetic! Sheeesh!
Joe Sims wrote:
>
>
> Eric, I have been following this very useful exchange between you and
> Diane, and I hope you continue; it is helpful. One point I should make: a
> very significant hurdle to any election process is the lack of money to run
> it. It might well be a sensible strategy, especially at this stage of its
> development, for ICANN to have some professional election help, but it has
> no money to pay for that, and given the reaction of some to the effort to
> generate funds through payments by registrars, the prospects for any
> significant funds soon are not good. There is a serious catch-22 here
> that for some ICANN critics is probably not coincidental: complain about
> the lack of an elected Board, and simultaneously make it impossible to
> generate the funds to elect a truly representative Board. I don't know
> what the solution to this conundrum is, but there is no doubt that the
> opposition to the creation of any regular source of funding is a serious
> impediment to devising and implementing a credible At Large election
> process.
>
>
> (Embedded
> image moved Eric Weisberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> to file: 07/15/99 01:09 PM
> pic24124.pcx)
>
>
> Extension:
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc: (bcc: Joe Sims/JonesDay)
> Subject: [IFWP] Why fail on purpose?
>
> A system can be designed to accomplish a purpose or to fail. ICANN must
> decide
> whether its purpose is to afford maximum diversity of representation or to
> develop a
> fool proof system for conducting meaningless elections (in the sense of its
> expressed
> representational aspiration).
>
> Diane Cabell reports:
>
> > The MAC recommended staggering the initial elections...
>
> > Yes, we will miss the one and only chance to elect all 9 seats at one
> > time...
>
> > Yes, there will rarely be more than 3 directors up for election at one
> time...
>
> > Yes, one or more of them will be regionally designated,
> > further reducing the potential for other minority interests to elect
> > their preferred candidate.
>
> AND,
>
> > The MAC still recommends a form of
> > preferential voting
>
> Lets talk this through.
>
> The MAC recommends that ICANN elect all of its proposed "at-large"
> directors using a
> form of preferential voting, but makes no suggestion on how that may be
> accomplished.
> Instead, it proposes a system in which it can not be done. It finds that
> representation of diverse stakeholder interests/avoidance of capture is the
> top level
> concern, but concludes that we should not even try to accomplish that
> purpose for
> technical reasons!
>
> What options might ICANN consider if it wants to work out the technical
> bugs before
> going live with "at-large" elections? Here are some suggestions off the
> top of my
> head. I suspect that members of this list can suggest other mechanisms.
>
> 1. ICANN can employ a professional election service to perform this
> function;
>
> 2. it can experiment on something besides the real thing--hold some "dress
> rehearsals"
> before opening night (like a "straw" vote on which new gTLDs to add); or
>
> 3. it might hold a single seat election, first, and the rest of the "at
> large"
> elections three months later.
>
> ICANN's failure to accomplish our basic aspiration is not in its stars.
> The question
> is whether it is in itself.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Name: att1.htm
> att1.htm Type: Hypertext Markup Language (text/html)
> Encoding: base64
> Description: Internet HTML
>
>
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
