[atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] elections

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

James Love wrote:

> There is no practical reason why the elections cannot be done before the 90
> days is over. Elizabeth can do the election, and you use the same nomination
> proceedures and mission that existed for the 90 day election.  People who
> want to continue this work will have a year, rather than 3 months, so they
> can act with more deliberation, assuming they are elected.  Given the fact
> that some members of the current "temporary" board are now endorsing the
> elimination of elections, and will be going to Shanghi, I think it is
> important to test their support in an election.

Agreed.  Now, will you withdraw your resignation so we can avoid any panel member substitutions and get on with the election details?  If you do not retract your resignation and YJ Park is substituted, I believe the elections will be delayed even further as the ICANN proteges among us will have a majority on the panel.  Jamie, this situation must be avoided.  At this point, I
consider the panel members (excepting you) who are in Bucharest, to be compromised by the byzantine corruption that is ICANN.  I think their support amongst our membership most certainly needs be tested and that is why the election ought to be our priority.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos


>
>
>     Jamie
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> > Very well, more to the point:  This panel ought to proceed immdiately to ELECTIONS.  Enough time has been wasted already, no more time needs be wasted.  The election muct take place in the last week of July.  Everything else (YJ etc.,) is subordinate to the elections IMO.  This Panel has lost all credibility and achieved nothing.  It's time for elections NOT appointments and
> > substitutions.  What do we need another panel member for at this point?  Elections.  Elections.  Elections.  That is the ONLY next move this panel ought to be contemplating at this point.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >
> > wolfgang@imv.au.dk wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Sotiris wrote: Frankly, I do not
> >>like
> >>the idea of having ICANN functionaries holding any executive positions
> >>within
> >>ICANNAtLarge.com.  I believe many of the members would probably agree that
> >>it's
> >>not a good idea.
> >>
> >>Dear Sotiris, my understanding is that we should respect the voters, their votes and our rules on which we have based the elections. It is not up to the elected members of the steering committee to say I like this guy or not. We can and should not dictate whom we want to have in the committee. Otherwise we would make the same mistakes you are critising so often correctly.
> >>
> >>BTW, I would like to concentrate on drafts for the mission statement and the bylaws.
> >>
> >>Best regards
> >>
> >>wolfgang,
> >>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-panel-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> >>For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-panel-help@lists.fitug.de
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-panel-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-panel-help@lists.fitug.de
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> ------
> James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
> http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love@cptech.org
> voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de