[CCWG-ACCT] Notice of polling of members on Recommendation 11 at the next meeting of the CCWG February 2nd 06:00UTC

Dr Eberhard W Lisse el at lisse.NA
Mon Feb 1 09:58:40 UTC 2016


you are missing the point.

The Charter wants us to work consensus-based and not by debating
proposals, voting on them and take the one succeeding in the vote.

Not unlike the GAC methodology debate we had, by the way...

The current issue is a good example, the GNSO reps seem to be
objecting to the current (2/3) proposal (for different reasons,
perhaps) as do I.

It would be good to establish whether more than a "small minority"
disagrees, because if so, the proposal dies for lack of Consensus.


On 2016-02-01 11:34, Nigel Roberts wrote:
> (for the avoidance of doubt, the word 'poll' and 'vote' are
> synonyms).
> On 01/02/16 09:33, Nigel Roberts wrote:
>> I have a linguistic problem with the meaning of the Charter.
>> In my native variant of the English language, the construction
>> appears to be 'such votes do not constitute votes'.
>> Does poll really mean 'straw poll' ??
>> On 01/02/16 09:29, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
>>> If we come up with multiple different proposals and put these to
>>> the vote/poll, we will exclude the Participants because only the
>>> Members are polling/voting.
>>>     "In appointing their members, the chartering organizations
>>>     should note that the CCWG-Accountability's decision-making
>>>     methodologies require that CCWG-Accountability members act by
>>>     consensus, and that polling will only be used in rare
>>>     instances and with the recognition that such polls do not
>>>     constitute votes."
>>>     "In a rare case, the chair(s) may decide that the use of a
>>>     poll is reasonable to assess the level of support for a
>>>     recommendation.  However, care should be taken in using polls
>>>     that they do not become votes, as there are often
>>>     disagreements about the meanings of the poll questions or of
>>>     the poll results."
>>> I do not have a concern about polling about the current 2/3
>>> proposal.
>>> I personally am comfortable with the 60% solution, if it gets a
>>> Public Comment.
>>> el
Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse  \        / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
el at lisse.NA            / *     |   Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
PO Box 8421             \     /
Bachbrecht, Namibia     ;____/

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list