[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Voting and cancellations From: asoto@ibero-americano.org Carlos, I copy the mail I sent this morning: "Dear, I again explain: to notice that there was a proposal for Jacqueline Morris, and should be considered to have been in time, were consulted Alejandro Pisanty, who agreed to withdraw his motion, support of Jacqueline, and not hold the vote. Here there is no arbitrary decision, it is a rational decision about joining criteria. According to Art. 4 of our Operating Principles and Art. 4.1 of our common LACRALO Rules of Procedures, in order not to lose more time, I decided to cancel the vote. Until that time we agreed Jacqueline Morris, of course because it is their proposal, Alejandro Pisanty, Sergio Salinas Porto, Humberto Carrasco and me. Then we inform the list that Alexander had withdrawn its motion, and if there was no opposition within seven days reported, Jacqueline's motion was approved. We can now vote a motion was withdrawn. Want to insist on a vote, the proposal should be voted on is Jacqueline's motion. If you insist on voting on the motion of Alejandro Pisanty, we would be voting on a withdrawal proposal and thus would enter a major policy inconsistency. So we wait seven days provided and informed view all comments generated, and thus end this process. " Cheers Alberto Soto From: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On behalf of Carlos Vera Quintana Posted on: Friday, August 21, 2015 4:52 pm To: Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob@gmail.com> CC: LACRALO Spanish <lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Voting and cancellations The point of order raised by Fatima affects and deals with the current process. It must be resolved immediately. He has received various supports. On the process: to exist and several official pronouncements on the list against the procedure adopted to give effect to the motion of Jacqueline (not the motion itself but by the illegality of the procedure of accepting a motion amending a motion process vote) there is no consensus and Jacqueline's motion is not accepted. That's obvious. I must agree that there is a very poor management: hasty, baseless, arbitrary and illegal. I suggest the outline of a responsible precautionary procedures to care formality and legality of such committee is adopted. There are for this several prestantes experienced lawyers and parliamentarians in the group, which could be very helpful! Cheers Carlos Vera Quintana 0988141143 Follow mecveraq On 21/08/2015, at 14:03, Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob@gmail.com <mailto:hcarrascob@gmail.com> > He wrote: Carlos, Sure to be solved. We'll do it at the end of the 7 days as Alberto said. Cheers Sent from my iPhone On 08/21/2015, at 19:57, Carlos Vera Quintana <cveraq@gmail.com <mailto:cveraq@gmail.com> > He wrote: Dear: This point of order raised by Fatima and has received various supports must be resolved. Cheers Carlos Vera Quintana 0988141143 Follow mecveraq On 21/08/2015, at 8:53, José Francisco Arce <josefranciscoarce@gmail.com <mailto:josefranciscoarce@gmail.com> > He wrote: SUPPORT THE MOTION OF FATIMA JOSEPH ARCE.- The August 20, 2015, 23:53, Fatima Cambronero <fatimacambronero@gmail.com <mailto:fatimacambronero@gmail.com> > He wrote: open and run a voting process, and you can not call consensus. Had qu - Arce, Jose F. http://lnkd.in/bPdTThz _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/28a200068a.html --]]