At the risk of perpetuating a thread that we all agree is off-topic from a number of very real concerns that the constituency is facing, let me add my one and only post about the balloting process. At this point, it seems to me that the ballot is being administered according to the currently accepted rules of the constituency. Others may believe that the ballot should be conducted in another manner--fortunately, we will shortly have a vote to settle that issue. Does this mean that we should all be happy with the procedures around the current election for Chair? Not really. The role of the ExCom is to serve the constituency and advance its best interests. Obviously, there are a lot of competing business models represented in the constituency, and as fierce competitors different people will obviously have different interpretations of what the best interests of the constituency are. The rules, bylaws and procedures that we have adopted are designed to allow the ExCom to resolve some of those differences and provide effective leadership. If we have an agreed upon framework for how we make decisions, then we can stop talking about how we make decisions and start talking about substance. If the rules are incomplete or are ignored, then we are left with a lot of discussion about the rules. I don't mean to imply that Bob, or anyone else on the ExCom, has intended to do anything other than serve the constituency to the best of their abilities. Indeed, Bob repeatedly changed the balloting procedure in order to address concerns raised by constituency members. However, it is very unusual to change the procedure for voting while a vote is underway. And, as we can see, as a result we end up with a lot of discussion about process instead of substance. I suggest that the ExCom declare the current ballot void due to error and issue a new one on the same question, using the rules currently in place throughout the election. We've already had one candidate for Chair essentially step aside and ask no one to vote for him due to the irregularities--that's unfortunate, because I think Eric is a worthy candidate worthy of consideration. I think the constituency (and the new Chair) would be much better served by having a clean and undisputed election. Presumably, the outcome will be the same, but hopefully the new Chair will be able to direct the constituency to a substantive discussion around the important issues that Bhavin has identified instead of a further digression on policy, procedures, and legitimacy. Jordyn On Sep 24, 2004, at 4:47 AM, Bhavin Turakhia wrote:
Hi all,
As of last count over 45 emails have been exchanged on the registrars list about how the ballot should have been differently held and how the election was not 100% proper.
Has the ballot been improperly conducted? Maybe Does it justify SO MUCH discussion - NO WAYS
I have spoken to several Registrars during my budget negotiations with ICANN. We ran a successful alliance of 76 Registrars and managed to obtain several concessions as all of you are aware. During this time a common thread of thought amongst every participant was exasperation at how the Registrars Constituency simply delves on issues that are totally useless and gets lost in political jargon and buereaucracy, and eventually every issue that has affected us Registrars since the last several years has not seen much progress or modification. To the extent that some Registrars I speak to openly call "the Registrars constituency as nothing but a vehicle to justify and approve ICANN and Verisign's injustice upon Registrars". Please don't get me wrong here. I am not criticising ICANN or Verisign. Life is difficult for everyone when trying to achieve consensus. But as of now clearly almost all Registrars have lost faith in the constituency simply because the constituency just sits idle when it comes to issues that potentially affect Registrars, while many have a lot to say about total non-issues
Here we have two issues that can threaten the existence of several Registrars and substantially change the market (the Verisign mail and the NSI issue) and I can count the number of mails sent about these issues on the fingers of my ONE hand. Does the Registrars constituency have any official position on these issues? NO. Has the Registrars constituency tried to accumulate opinion or contact Registrars and ask them what they think about this? NO. Yet 47 long mails have been exchanged to and fro about a tiny oversight in the ballot which does not really matter.
Even during the ICANN Budget, the constituency supposedly tried some outreach, held two phone calls (one of which was hardly attended) and was supposed to come up with a proposed official position document which never happened. I tried to steer the budget issue both from within the constituency and from outside and realized that I was actually facing resistance when trying to work on it from within.
During the ICANN budget alliance process that I was steering - we probably did not do everything in the perfect way. We did not hold the perfect ballots, we did not have large task forces, we did not organize conference calls, we did not have resources to spend, we did not have an expensive boardrooms.org software. Yet things worked. Things worked because we were a bunch of Registrars, focussing on a common issue, and not getting involved in tiny road blocks along the way.
Given that the constituency does not have the same luxury of using half-baked processes. Given that the constituency has by-laws that must be followed. But lets cut some slack here. So the ballot did not start with an open result. However at this point in time it is open since the last 24 hours (or greater) and people have the ability to change their votes across the next 3 days. How does it make ANY difference as to whether the ballot was not open from Monday onwards. It is precisely this kind of bureaucracy that WE as Registrars try to fight with ICANN and with other organizations - and we ourselves end up falling prey to it in our own backyard? It is precisely this sort of a discussion and time wastage that convinces most Registrars that the constituency is a waste of time.
Lets just get on with our lives and get this over with, for whoever gets elected - Bhavin, Jordynn or Eric, we have BUSY weeks ahead of us.
This is my FIRST and LAST mail about the ballot issue - my next mail, either in official capacity, or in an unofficial one, will be with regards to rallying support and consensus and opinion and discussion on the REAL ISSUES WE HAVE AT HAND.
PS: Sorry Bob, for saying anything about my name being spelt incorrectly in the ballot - I should have lived with that, it makes no damn difference to the registrar community whether my name is correctly spelt or not .....
Best Regards Bhavin Turakhia Founder, CEO and Chairman DirectI -------------------------------------- http://www.directi.com Direct Line: +91 (22) 5679 7600 Direct Fax: +91 (22) 5679 7510 Board Line (USA): +1 (415) 240 4172 Board Line (India): +91 (22) 5679 7500 --------------------------------------