[registrars] Focussing on the real issues

[Jordyn A. Buchanan]

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
> --------------------------------------
>
>