<html>
<body>
Dear Registrars: The ballot on the motion has been sent to the Voting
Members List. If you are other than the voting member of a dues
paying registrar, you may want to be sure that your voting member
received the ballot. <br><br>
The ballot will remain open until midnight GMT, 11 January 2008. A
second and third ballot will be sent between now and the closing of the
ballot. Voting members may vote several times but any secondary
ballots overwrite the prior ballots. The final results will be open
for all to see.<br><br>
For your convenience, the Main Motion and the Unfriendly Amendment are
posted at the following URL:<br><br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>
<a href="http://icannregistrars.org/Talk:ICANN_Registrars" eudora="autourl">
http://icannregistrars.org/Talk:ICANN_Registrars<br><br>
</a>I call your attention to the following "preamble" to the
Main Motion:<br><br>
The Motion: Move that the Registrar Constituency approve the following
statement as Registrar Constituency Statement on Domain Tasting: The
Registrars Constituency (RC)<font color="#FF0000"> has not reached
Supermajority support </font>for a particular position on Domain Name
Tasting. Below are statements of the views/positions espoused by RC
members. <br><br>
end quote:<br><br>
Searching our By-Laws and Rules of Procedure, I do not find a definition
for "Supermajority" nor any reference to a
"Supermajority". It *is* clear that any amendment to the
By-Laws requires a 66% majority. However, the ICANN By-Laws make
multiple references to Supermajority.<br><br>
Article 16, Additional Definitions states "'Supermajority Vote'
means a vote of more than sixty-six (66) percent of the members present
at a meeting of the applicable body". <br><br>
Those who drafted the Registrar Constituency By-Laws and Rules of
Procedure were opposed to our earlier use of "straw
ballots". They insisted that no one promulgate *any* position
to our Constituency that was not supported by a vote taken when a quorum
of voting members was present. I believe that, until our last two
meetings, we have not ever had a quorum of voting members present at a
meeting, neither "live" nor by teleconference. Thus, we
have relied upon the written ballot. Our Rules of Procedure give us
clear instructions on how we are to ballot on motions. This present
ballot complies with those instructions. <br><br>
So, when voting on the motion and the unfriendly amendment, keep in mind
that positions of the Registrar Constituency *do_not* require a 66%
majority and that, until now, we have not taken *any* vote on whether
domain tasting is "good, bad or indifferent". Till now,
it has been all talk, no vote.<br><br>
The Main Motion does not actually define the position of the
Constituency. It *is* a clear and carefully drafted statement
of two opposing "Views" of "many
registrars". If the majority of ballots cast for the
*Amendment* are favourable, there will be a second ballot which will seek
determine whether the Constituency supports one or the other View
described by the Main Motion.<br><br>
Respectfully submitted,<br>
Bob Connelly<br>
Secretary<br><br>
</body>
</html>