[At-Large] Next ALAC Teleconference / Board Liaison Vote

[Nick Ashton-Hart]

Since the ALAC voted in favour of using instant runoff, which of  
course in this case would have the same results as using a first-past- 
the-post system. However, I was trying to propose a vote that would  
differ to the least extent possible from what the ALAC had already  
agreed to do.

On 4 Sep 2007, at 09:07, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Just a silly question.
> If we have only two candidates, does the method of vote have any  
> importance, considering that at the end of the day one will have  
> more votes than the other?
> Cheers,
> Roberto
>
>
> From: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac- 
> bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Nick Ashton-Hart
> Sent: 04 September 2007 08:37
> To: Izumi AIZU
> Cc: ALAC
> Subject: Re: [At-Large] Next ALAC Teleconference / Board Liaison Vote
>
> This has been amended - however, may I take this opportunity to  
> remind the committee that the reason why a Wiki was setup for you  
> was so that you could manage and create the content of this  
> workspace for yourselves; I'm happy to make these amendments but  
> there's nothing preventing you from doing it for yourself...
>
> With respect to the ALAC board liaison vote, the vote has been  
> technically ready for some time. The vote was to be held after a  
> vote on the rules of procedure, however, there have been questions  
> raised about how the ROP vote can be held due to the structure of  
> the text in question. Some of the members of the ROP committee have  
> been on leave (it being August after all) and so have been unable  
> to schedule a teleconference to decide what to recommend to the  
> committee.
>
> Might I suggest that since the the method of voting - instant  
> runoff - has already been the subject of a vote, perhaps on an  
> extraordinary basis the committee could simply proceed to a vote,  
> using the ROPs in their current form for this purpose, again on an  
> extraordinary basis so that this vote could be held?
>
> On 4 Sep 2007, at 05:39, Izumi AIZU wrote:
>
>> According to the ALAC wiki, next monthly conference call
>> is set for Sep 10, which is Monday. I thought we agreed
>> to have monthly call on every second Tuesday.
>>
>> I read the meeting summary, but there is not mention
>> about the change.
>>
>> Could someone clarify? (sorry if I missed some other
>> information or email).
>>
>> AND, what happened to the ALAC Board liaison vote?
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> izumi
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ALAC mailing list
>> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge- 
>> lists.icann.org
>>
>> At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org
>> ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
>
> -- 
> Regards,
>
> Nick Ashton-Hart
> Director, At-Large
> ICANN
> PO Box 32160
> London N4 2XY
> United Kingdom
> Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011]
> USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460
> Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135
> mobile: +44 (7774) 932798
> email: nick.ashton-hart at icann.org
> Win IM: ashtonhart at hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart at mac.com /  
> Skype: nashtonhart
> Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
>
>
>

-- 
Regards,

Nick Ashton-Hart
PO Box 32160
London N4 2XY
United Kingdom
Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011
USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460
Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135
mobile: +44 (7774) 932798
email: nashton at consensus.pro
Win IM: ashtonhart at hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart at mac.com /  
Skype: nashtonhart
Online Bio:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20070904/70bd4e00/attachment.html