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 --------------------------------------
At 01:47 AM 9/24/04, Bhavin Turakhia wrote:
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 .....
Dear Bhavin: I finally figured out why I had so much trouble with TurakHIA;-} In Japanese, "HAI" is "YES". So you were "Turak Yes" methought. Personal regards, BobC
Bhavin, Resolving the ballot issue was important in order to reduce the likelihood that the results would be called into question later, as has happened before. And I disagree with a lot of your analysis. A number of registrars work hard at the *important* issues, especially given the time they also need to spend running their businesses. I don't think you're giving enough credit to them for that. We are not always going to agree on what the *important* issues are. That is certainly going to vary given the range of business models. Hopefully the new Chair will take that into consideration. Regarding the budget, it was unfortunate that some attempted to turn it into a small registrar versus large registrar issue. I also hope the new Chair will be able to be *non-partisan* in that regard or nothing of any substance will ever be accomplished. I'd also be interested in hearing what concessions your group was able to get from ICANN regarding the budget. Thanks, Tim -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bhavin Turakhia Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 3:48 AM To: 'Registrars Mail List' Cc: 'Jordyn Buchanan'; 'Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine' Subject: [registrars] Focussing on the real issues 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 --------------------------------------
Hey Tim,
Resolving the ballot issue was important in order to reduce the likelihood that the results would be called into question later, as has happened before.
I agree ..... And pardon me if I have been a tad bit harsh, however we live in interesting times and I was simply voicing out a common concern, using the current issue as a vehicle. I agree that a process must be followed to the best of ones ability
Regarding the budget, it was unfortunate that some attempted to turn it into a small registrar versus large registrar issue. I also hope the new Chair will be able to be *non-partisan* in that regard or nothing of any substance will ever be accomplished.
Better said than the best. I couldn't agree more. As registrars we already have enuf issues breathing down our neck, to sit and resort to creating differences between us as a group would indeed be very foolish. Infact that was one of the major challenges faced during the work on the budget process. I am not trying to undermine any effort that other Registrars took in the entire process at all, infact I think the budget was one of the issues where most registrars did take part in some way or another to bring to ICANN's attention the implications of the change. as a group when we were working on the budget process, while apart from 1 or 2, most other registrars fit in the small category, however our budget document and requested concessions were NOT AT ALL motivated based on that. Infact we requested around 11-12 concessions of which 5-6 were actually more beneficial to the larger Registrars and some of them actually detrimental in some way to the smaller ones. However consensus is never a process of "I am different and you are different". It is always based on reconciling differences, and making reasonable compromises, in order to achieve the greater good. If you wish to check the set of concessions we requested and the set that were actually confirmed, you can always refer to this link - http://www.icannbudget.org/AltBudgetProposal.htm I share the same thoughts as do you, and I do believe all the candidates who currently are standing up for the chair position, likely fit the bill of being fair and just, as do the current ex-com members, as is required in a position of responsibility. - B
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 --------------------------------------
Bhavin Turakhia wrote:
Hi all,
As of last count over 45 emails
(That's w/o Ross Rader posting...)
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'm not really in a position to comment on whether it deserved so much discussion (since I didn't take the time to study each post) but I certainly didn't find it important enough to follow and I tend to agree with you on this.
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.
One issue that I think is important is the issue that Paul posted about the "false whois penalty" -- The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday approved a bill that would -- increase jail time for identity thieves and other fraudulent Web users who -- register sites under false identities I don't remember seeing anyone post any reply to that. The question I have is why the registrar's constituency was not involved in working with government on any of this. Another issue is the mass accreditation of registrars just to get registry threads. I don't think that it was right that several opportunistic registrars were allowed to grab up multiple accreditations after ICANN apparently lifted the written or unwritten ban on registrars having more than one accreditation. Obviously something happened with this since if it was allowed previously it would have happened before it happened (got that?).
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
I agree with this. I have always felt that there was to much focus on procedure.
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
I have to say that one of the most impressive things that Bhavin did with this was place multiple phone calls to try and get support for this.
- 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.
From my perspective things worked because Bhavin did all the work and basically made it easy for everyone to sign off on things and push things through.
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.
My personal opinion was that I didn't care. But I can definitely see it being an issue in other cases in the future. My suggestion would be for the constituency to have a person outside the consituency play a role in helping with things like this so that we don't have to go back and forth determining who makes a better point of interpreting rules and procedures. Larry Erlich
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 --------------------------------------
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc. 215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@DomainRegistry.com -----------------------------------------------------------------
participants (5)
-
Bhavin Turakhia -
Jordyn A. Buchanan -
Larry Erlich -
Robert F. Connelly -
Tim Ruiz