RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Chuck raises an important point. Do the CSG Councilors intend that their votes be secret even within their SG? A secret ballot at the Council level is a different issue from keeping Councilors' votes secret from their constituents. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Date: Fri, October 16, 2009 10:08 am To: "Mary Wong" <MWong@piercelaw.edu> Cc: "Council GNSO" <council@gnso.icann.org> Strictly from a personal point of view: + I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons, but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors. + If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be communicated to the SG. + If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding whether to hold a secret or open ballot. I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction. In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and not my personal views. Chuck From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate Hi On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?
I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case. Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
Seriously? I don't intend my vote to be secret within my SG. -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 1:16 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate Chuck raises an important point. Do the CSG Councilors intend that their votes be secret even within their SG? A secret ballot at the Council level is a different issue from keeping Councilors' votes secret from their constituents. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Date: Fri, October 16, 2009 10:08 am To: "Mary Wong" <MWong@piercelaw.edu> Cc: "Council GNSO" <council@gnso.icann.org> Strictly from a personal point of view: + I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons, but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors. + If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be communicated to the SG. + If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding whether to hold a secret or open ballot. I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction. In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and not my personal views. Chuck From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate Hi On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?
I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case. Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
I agree with Mary that there is a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN stakeholder groups and it would be easier to built trust if everyone is given the space to cast a secret ballot. ________________________________ From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org on behalf of Rosette, Kristina Sent: Sat 10/17/2009 1:37 AM To: Tim Ruiz; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate Seriously? I don't intend my vote to be secret within my SG. -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 1:16 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate Chuck raises an important point. Do the CSG Councilors intend that their votes be secret even within their SG? A secret ballot at the Council level is a different issue from keeping Councilors' votes secret from their constituents. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Date: Fri, October 16, 2009 10:08 am To: "Mary Wong" <MWong@piercelaw.edu> Cc: "Council GNSO" <council@gnso.icann.org> Strictly from a personal point of view: + I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons, but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors. + If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be communicated to the SG. + If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding whether to hold a secret or open ballot. I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction. In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and not my personal views. Chuck From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate Hi On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?
I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case. Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ATMD Bird & Bird LLP is a Singapore law practice registered as a limited liability partnership in Singapore with registration number T08LL0001K. The firm is associated with Bird & Bird, an international legal practice. It is solely a Singapore law practice and is not an affiliate, branch or subsidiary of Bird & Bird or Bird & Bird LLP. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message (including attachments) contains privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not to take any action in reliance on it nor to disseminate, distribute, publish or copy this message. If you have received this message in error, please accept our apologies, delete all copies from your system and notify us at mailto:atmdmail@twobirds.com . Unless it relates to the official business of ATMD Bird & Bird LLP, any opinions or matters expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Cyril, On Oct 17, 2009, at 5:11 AM, Cyril Chua wrote:
I agree with Mary that there is a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN stakeholder groups and it would be easier to built trust if everyone is given the space to cast a secret ballot.
Actually, what she said (below) was the opposite, that as there is mistrust in the ICANN community generally, transparency and accountability are important, and hence there should not be a secret ballot. Anyway, there's obviously a variety of views that won't be squared through further debate, so let's just vote and move on. As long as there is no gag order and people's right to publicly declare their stance per usual is not violated, those of us who are compelled to abide by transparency will be able to participate regardless and to avail ourselves of that right at the public meeting. Best, Bill
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Hi
On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?
I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case.
But how do you prove to your SG that is actually what you voted (and that you represented them appropriately?). Adrian Kinderis -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Saturday, 17 October 2009 4:16 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate Chuck raises an important point. Do the CSG Councilors intend that their votes be secret even within their SG? A secret ballot at the Council level is a different issue from keeping Councilors' votes secret from their constituents. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Date: Fri, October 16, 2009 10:08 am To: "Mary Wong" <MWong@piercelaw.edu> Cc: "Council GNSO" <council@gnso.icann.org> Strictly from a personal point of view: + I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons, but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors. + If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be communicated to the SG. + If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding whether to hold a secret or open ballot. I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction. In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and not my personal views. Chuck From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate Hi On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?
I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case. Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
Glen could privately communicate the votes of each SG's Councilors to the SG chair or in the case of constituencies to the Constituency chairs. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 3:40 AM To: Tim Ruiz; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
But how do you prove to your SG that is actually what you voted (and that you represented them appropriately?).
Adrian Kinderis
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Saturday, 17 October 2009 4:16 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Chuck raises an important point. Do the CSG Councilors intend that their votes be secret even within their SG? A secret ballot at the Council level is a different issue from keeping Councilors' votes secret from their constituents.
Tim
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Date: Fri, October 16, 2009 10:08 am To: "Mary Wong" <MWong@piercelaw.edu> Cc: "Council GNSO" <council@gnso.icann.org>
Strictly from a personal point of view:
+ I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons, but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors.
+ If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be communicated to the SG.
+ If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding whether to hold a secret or open ballot.
I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction. In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and not my personal views.
Chuck
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Hi
On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?
I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case.
Cheers Mary
Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
Hi, In a truly secret ballot, which is what we are planning to set up provisionally (awaiting the decision of the council on closing the vote) it would not be possible for Glen to identify the voters. a. On 17 Oct 2009, at 07:31, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Glen could privately communicate the votes of each SG's Councilors to the SG chair or in the case of constituencies to the Constituency chairs.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 3:40 AM To: Tim Ruiz; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
But how do you prove to your SG that is actually what you voted (and that you represented them appropriately?).
Adrian Kinderis
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Saturday, 17 October 2009 4:16 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Chuck raises an important point. Do the CSG Councilors intend that their votes be secret even within their SG? A secret ballot at the Council level is a different issue from keeping Councilors' votes secret from their constituents.
Tim
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Date: Fri, October 16, 2009 10:08 am To: "Mary Wong" <MWong@piercelaw.edu> Cc: "Council GNSO" <council@gnso.icann.org>
Strictly from a personal point of view:
+ I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons, but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors.
+ If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be communicated to the SG.
+ If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding whether to hold a secret or open ballot.
I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction. In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and not my personal views.
Chuck
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Hi
On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?
I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case.
Cheers Mary
Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
HI On Oct 19, 2009, at 6:21 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
In a truly secret ballot, which is what we are planning to set up provisionally
Why? It's not been apparent that there's a majority for closure.
(awaiting the decision of the council on closing the vote)
When and how do we vote on this, I must have missed it. Thanks, Bill
it would not be possible for Glen to identify the voters.
a.
On 17 Oct 2009, at 07:31, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Glen could privately communicate the votes of each SG's Councilors to the SG chair or in the case of constituencies to the Constituency chairs.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 3:40 AM To: Tim Ruiz; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
But how do you prove to your SG that is actually what you voted (and that you represented them appropriately?).
Adrian Kinderis
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Saturday, 17 October 2009 4:16 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Chuck raises an important point. Do the CSG Councilors intend that their votes be secret even within their SG? A secret ballot at the Council level is a different issue from keeping Councilors' votes secret from their constituents.
Tim
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Date: Fri, October 16, 2009 10:08 am To: "Mary Wong" <MWong@piercelaw.edu> Cc: "Council GNSO" <council@gnso.icann.org>
Strictly from a personal point of view:
+ I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons, but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors.
+ If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be communicated to the SG.
+ If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding whether to hold a secret or open ballot.
I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction. In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and not my personal views.
Chuck
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Hi
On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?
I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case.
Cheers Mary
Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
*********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************
Hi, As I mentioned when my plan for an open ballot was first opposed, I will hold a vote on closing the ballot just before you all vote for chair. That is why the secret ballot is being set up provisionally. I have asked Glen to prepare paper ballots, just in case, the motion to close the vote succeeds. I have also asked her to look into means for dealing with any absentee ballots in case not all council members can be in Seoul for the meeting; this includes investigating how quickly the standard email vote can be turned around. I am hoping everyone will be there so that this complexity can be avoided. I have yet to speak to Legal about the legitimacy of just counting ballots before receiving absentee to see whether the absentee are necessary to declare a winner. I know the absentee ballots would be essential in figuring out a leader in case we need to do a runoff given the formula by which we will need to calculate the leader. I hope this covers the questions. a. On 19 Oct 2009, at 01:52, William Drake wrote:
HI
On Oct 19, 2009, at 6:21 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
In a truly secret ballot, which is what we are planning to set up provisionally
Why? It's not been apparent that there's a majority for closure.
(awaiting the decision of the council on closing the vote)
When and how do we vote on this, I must have missed it.
Thanks,
Bill
it would not be possible for Glen to identify the voters.
a.
On 17 Oct 2009, at 07:31, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Glen could privately communicate the votes of each SG's Councilors to the SG chair or in the case of constituencies to the Constituency chairs.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 3:40 AM To: Tim Ruiz; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
But how do you prove to your SG that is actually what you voted (and that you represented them appropriately?).
Adrian Kinderis
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Saturday, 17 October 2009 4:16 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Chuck raises an important point. Do the CSG Councilors intend that their votes be secret even within their SG? A secret ballot at the Council level is a different issue from keeping Councilors' votes secret from their constituents.
Tim
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Date: Fri, October 16, 2009 10:08 am To: "Mary Wong" <MWong@piercelaw.edu> Cc: "Council GNSO" <council@gnso.icann.org>
Strictly from a personal point of view:
+ I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons, but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors.
+ If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be communicated to the SG.
+ If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding whether to hold a secret or open ballot.
I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction. In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and not my personal views.
Chuck
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Hi
On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?
I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case.
Cheers Mary
Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
*********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************
participants (7)
-
Adrian Kinderis -
Avri Doria -
Cyril Chua -
Gomes, Chuck -
Rosette, Kristina -
Tim Ruiz -
William Drake