Re: [atlarge-discuss] Point of personal privilege -- I'm being disenfranchised by glitches in the system!

[Izumi AIZU <izumi@anr.org>]

Dear all,

I kind of agree with Norbert that there could have been some solution for Judyth.

But given the tight deadline situation it seems there is little room for 
pragmatic
solution to give her a ballot.

I was quite annoyed when the ICANN staff "destroyed" all the record
of the first election right after they confirmed the result. It did ignore so
many people's good intentions, and resulted in a waste of resources.
That led the debate about the cost of running another election, and
the fee issues since the first round was free of charge which I advocated
very strongly.

But that is not recoverable once trashed. A big mistake indeed.

As one of the members of the interim panel, I would like to express my
personal apology to her - yes, we should have taken this kind of confusion
into consideration before organizing the election and made clear how
people could become eligible to vote.

So sorry about this,

izumi


At 08:53 02/08/04 +0200, nhklein@gmx.net wrote:
> > At 11:48 PM 03/08/02 -0400, espresso@e-scape.net wrote:
> >
> > >However, I went through my archives and dug out the original messages
> > from
> > >ICANN which confirm my status as a member, assuming that these would be
> > >sufficient for the Powers That Be to look into the matter and perhaps
> > even
> > >send me a ballot in time.
> >
> > That means you are a member (or at least could vote)
> > in the ICANN at Large elections which elected Karl
> > Auerbach and others. That does not mean that you are
> > automatically a member of the icannatlarge.com which
> > was begun subsequent to the subsequent Atlarge study.
> > Although that is an interesting point.
>
> I think this is not only an interesting, but also a very important point:
> probably a point where lagalities and common sense are in conflict.
>
> Is it not natural that a person who registered for the only open "ICANN
> At-Large" elections thinks to be also authorized to vote in the "icannatlarge"
> elections - in our organization that was created to take up the history which
> the ICANN board wants to cut?
>
> If we have any common sense flexibility (concerned with content and not only
> with formalities) in our organization, I would hope that the election
> watchdogs and the people elected ad interim could find a solution.
>
> Or at least an apology that we did not think about the implications of the
> membership in the "ICANN At-Large" for the membership in our "ICANNATLARGE."
>
> Norbert
>
> --
> Norbert Klein
> Open Forum of Cambodia: www.forum.org.kh
>
> Support democratic control of the Internet!
> Go to http://www.icannatlarge.com and Join ICANN At Large!
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de


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