[governance] Vote on proposed amendment to IGC charter:
Babatope Soremi
babatope at gmail.com
Tue Aug 25 17:09:19 EDT 2009
Hi all,
While I've not read every single line posted in the past couple of weeks, I
find myself asking what we seek to achieve with all of this? I also wonder
if perhaps, we've not forgotten the 'real' reason this list started off.
I've done a quick look at our recent list activities & wonder if we've not
expended much more energy than its necessary by failing to adher to such
small details like;
1) Give the other party the benefit of doubt
2) Disagree, discuss & criticise an opinion/idea without the negative bonus
of running down the person
3) State your position but don't assume it *must *be followed
4) The sum of all is better than its part
Anyway, I'm sure the work each of us does in our different localities
continue but for me, I'm take a break.
Best,
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
> wrote:
> Ian and ll,
>
> I wish I could trust Gingers judgment and sense of fairness,
> but I cannot given her recent name calling of myself and others.
> As such Ginger along with a few others have demonstrated by their
> own actions and words that their behavior and especially ethical
> judgment leaves far too much to be desired accordingly Ian.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
> >Sent: Aug 24, 2009 3:37 PM
> >To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> >Subject: Re: [governance] Vote on proposed amendment to IGC charter:
> >
> >The list of members compiled after the last election which is being
> referred
> >to includes all previously affirmed members, irrespective of whether they
> >voted or not in the last co-ordinator election, plus new members who
> voted.
> >I have checked that this is so. So there are people on the list who are
> >members but may not have voted last time. They should all receive a ballot
> >paper IMHO (unless they have left the list or are deceased).
> >
> >As Coordinators Ginger and I will have to deal with any individual
> anomalies
> >that arise here and interpret the Charter as best we can. (One possibility
> I
> >can think of is someone who was on the list for more than two months prior
> >to the last election, can confirm they are civil society, but did not vote
> >so was not added to the list). Anyone in such a position should contact
> >Ginger and myself immediately off list and we will make an appropriate
> >judgement as regards validity.
> >
> >Ginger and I will also have to interpret whether people still on the list
> at
> >January 29 2009 are still valid members for purposes of a vote. I am
> >inclined to suggest that those who are deceased or who have left the list
> >are not to be counted.
> >
> >Ginger and I will do the best we can to run this process smoothly, and
> >hopefully without too much process discussion. We may have to make some
> >judgements as regards validity of votes in accordance with the Charter,
> and
> >we will do so and announce our conclusions to the list with our reasoning.
> >Of course anything we do can be the subject of an appeal at the end of the
> >process (which is a good protective mechanism!)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >(at My understanding of a valid voter would be
> >
> >1. Anyone on the list compiled after last coordinator election (the list
> at
> >http://www.igcaucus.org/node/12/%253Cbr%2520/%253E.)
> >
> >Plus
> >
> >2. Anyone on the previous members list from
> >
> >
> >On 25/08/09 3:26 AM, "Avri Doria" <avri at psg.com> wrote:
> >
> >> hi,
> >>
> >> My assumption is that everyone who was on the members list at the time
> >> of that last election (members who either voted then or who were
> >> already members) is a voting member for the amendment since the list
> >> is cumulative. It does not say only those who voted, it says anyone on
> >> that voters list whic include both pervious members and those who
> >> joined by signing the on to the charter in the act of voting.
> >>
> >> what i am not sure about is someone who has quit the list since then.
> >> since a basic requirement for membership is being on the list.
> >>
> >> a.
> >>
> >> On 24 Aug 2009, at 12:40, David Souter wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear Ginger:
> >>>
> >>> Your answer raises a separate question.
> >>>
> >>> Do you mean here that only people who actually voted in the last
> >>> coordinator election will be entitled to vote on this amendment, or
> >>> that those who were entitled to vote at that time will be entitled
> >>> now?
> >>>
> >>> There could be quite a substantial difference.
> >>>
> >>> David Souter
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Start Original Message -----
> >>> Sent: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:56:00 -0430
> >>> From: Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com>
> >>> To: "'governance at lists.cpsr.org'" <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> >>> Subject: Re: [governance] Vote on proposed amendment to IGC charter:
> >>> requirement
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello Charity and all. I am replying to the list, because several
> >>>> people
> >>> have had this same question.
> >>>
> >>> The requirement for voting for a proposed amendment to the charter is
> >>> different from an election, for instance, of a co-coordinator. The
> >>> Charter states that **³The membership requirements for amending the
> >>> charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In
> >>> amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election
> >>> will be
> >>> deemed a member for amending the charter."** That list is at
> >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/12/%253Cbr%2520/%253E.
> >>>
> >>> A "normal" election requires, as you note, that one be a member for at
> >>> least two months. As I understand it, in order to take part in a
> >>> vote on
> >>> a charter amendment, you must have voted in the previous election, in
> >>> this case, the last co-coordinator election in December, 2008.
> >>>
> >>> Please correct me if I am wrong.
> >>>
> >>> If anyone has other questions, or would like any clarification, please
> >>> post them.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks! Best, Ginger
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Charity Gamboa wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Ginger,
> >>>
> >>> I joined IGC January 2009. Please correct me if I am wrong if I
> >>> assumed that when you are a member for at least 2 months with the IGC
> >>> you can vote. It says in the Charter that "Each person who is
> >>> subscribed to the list at least two (2) months before the election
> >>> will be given a voter account." The list of IGC members was last
> >>> updated January 29 but I do not see my name as member of that list.
> >>> Does this mean then that I cannot vote? Or basically I am not a
> >>> member of IGC because I am not on the list? Will definitely
> >>> appreciate any clarifications.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks! :)
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Charity
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 5:31 AM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Dear IGC members,
> >>>
> >>> A proposal has been made for amendment to the IGC charter (please
> >>> see full details below and attached).
> >>>
> >>> IGC members should currently be discussing the proposed amendment
> >>> on the list in case there are any doubts or opinions they would
> >>> like to express.
> >>>
> >>> The Charter states that ³The membership requirements for
> >>> amending the charter are based on the most currently available
> >>> voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the
> >>> previous election will be deemed a member for amending the
> >>> charter." That list is at
> >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/12/%253Cbr%2520/%253E.
> >>>
> >>> Since approval of any amendment requires a two-thirds approval,
> >>> please be sure to vote, whatever your decision may be. This is a
> >>> good way to keep the IGC on track by exercising your right and
> >>> obligation to vote.
> >>>
> >>> Each person sent a ballot paper will be asked first to affirm
> >>> whether they are a member of civil society. Only civil society
> >>> members are entitled to vote. You will be given a choice of
> >>> "yes", "no" or "abstain" to show your agreement or non-agreement
> >>> with the proposed amendment. If you prefer not to vote, please
> >>> use the "abstain" option that allows us to keep you on the
> >>> updated membership list as a current member.
> >>>
> >>> The ballot will be a secret ballot. The ballot will be open for
> >>> two weeks (until September 15th). An announcement of the results
> >>> will be made as soon as possible thereafter. You should expect to
> >>> receive a ballot paper before Wednesday next week (September
> >>> 2nd), possibly earlier. If you believe you are entitled to vote
> >>> and have not received a ballot paper by then please contact me
> >>> directly.
> >>>
> >>> Many thanks to Dr. Derrick Cogburn for once again accepting the
> >>> task of running this electronic ballot procedure for the IGC.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Ginger Paque
> >>> for
> >>> Ginger Paque and Ian Peter
> >>> IGC Co-coordinators
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> To the IGC Caucus and IGC Caucus Coordinators:
> >>>
> >>> According to the IGC Charter, Amendments to the Charter are made
> >>> according to the following process:
> >>>
> >>> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer
> >>> than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds
> >>> (2/3)
> >>> of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending
> >>> the charter are based on the most currently available voters list.
> >>> In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous
> >>> election
> >>> will be
> >>> deemed a member for amending the charter.
> >>>
> >>> Because of the events on the list over the last month or longer,
> >>> the
> >>> undersigned have decided to propose Posting Rule amendments to the
> >>> charter (attached to this email) that will make it less
> >>> problematic to
> >>> deal with disruptive behavior on the IG Caucus list in the
> >>> future. Part
> >>> of the problem we are trying to remedy is the fact that the sole
> >>> responsibility rests with the coordinators without them having
> >>> any clear
> >>> guidelines or
> >>> assistance.
> >>>
> >>> In proposing these amendments we looked at RFC 3683 "A Practice for
> >>> Revoking Posting Rights to IETF Mailing Lists "
> >>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3683.txt
> >>> RFC 3934 and " Updates to RFC 2418 Regarding the Management
> >>> of IETF
> >>> Mailing Lists" http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3934.txt , as
> >>> well as the
> >>> rules currently in effect for ICANN's GA List for guidance.
> >>>
> >>> The proposed amendment contains the following elements:
> >>>
> >>> - statement of the purpose of the IGC list
> >>> - set of guidelines for decorum on the IGC list and any other IGC
> >>> lists that may be created
> >>> - description of inappropriate postings for IGC list(s)
> >>>
> >>> We are also proposing that the coordinators can create, if they
> >>> desire
> >>> to do so, an advisory body to help them in determining when the
> >>> posting rules have been infringed. The decision and
> >>> responsibility of
> >>> when to take action is, however, still left with the coordinators.
> >>>
> >>> If this charter amendment is accepted by a 2/3 vote of the current
> >>> members, action for suspension of removal can be initiated in the
> >>> following manner:
> >>>
> >>> a. the coordinators decide on their own that action needs to be
> >>> taken
> >>> b. the advisory group recommends it to coordinators and they agree
> >>> that action needs to be taken
> >>> c. a group of 20 IGC members publicly petitions the coordinators to
> >>> consider action and the coordinators agree actions should be taken
> >>>
> >>> The appeals mechanism remains the same as it is in the current
> >>> charter:
> >>>
> >>>> ? Any decision for suspension can be appealed.
> >>>> Any decision to remove someone from the list will
> >>>> call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team.
> >>>
> >>> Signed by the following members of the IGC as listed on
> >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >>>
> >>> Carlos A.Afonso
> >>> Vittorio Bertola
> >>> Wilie Curie
> >>> Avri Doria (co-author)
> >>> Wiliam Drake
> >>> Bret Fausett
> >>> Robin Gross
> >>> Michael Gurstein
> >>> Jeanette Hofmann (co-author)
> >>> Wolfgang Kleinwächter
> >>> Jeremy Malcolm
> >>> Lee W. McKnight
> >>> Jacqueline A. Morris
> >>> Adam Peake
> >>> Parminder Singh
> >>> David Souter
> >>> Christopher Wilkinson
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >>> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>
> >>> For all list information and functions, see:
> >>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- End Original Message -----
> >>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >>> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >>>
> >>> For all list information and functions, see:
> >>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >>>
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >>
> >> For all list information and functions, see:
> >> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >
> >
> >____________________________________________________________
> >You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> > governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >
> >For all list information and functions, see:
> > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
> Abraham Lincoln
>
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
> often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> liability
> depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
> Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
> jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
> Phone: 214-244-4827
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
--
Babatope Soremi
I'm totally sold out to changing my world for good....
Register your Domain: (http://www.nairahost.com.ng/ngclient/aff.php?aff=007
You can't give what you don't have........
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090825/9ad1d72d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
For all list information and functions, see:
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
More information about the Governance
mailing list