Egm 2

[Hazel Pegg]

The BIG tag holders would be the ones to benefit most in the long run from certain changes that these resolutions would allow.

Which clauses allow this and which changes are you referring to?

It is an unholy alliance of like minded corporate types. Any SMALL tag holder would be bonkers to go along with these proposals, thus Nominet aren't on the phone to them.

AFAIK Nominet are contacting all members. Smaller members have reported to nom-steer that they have been contacted.

Hazel

 

[olebean]

AFAIK Nominet are contacting all members. Smaller members have reported to nom-steer that they have been contacted.

Hazel

Hazel

Cheers for clearing that up

OB

 

[tmsdomreg]

AFAIK Nominet are contacting all members. Smaller members have reported to nom-steer that they have been contacted.

Hazel

I can confirm that insofar as we had a call a few days ago. It did cross my mind if it was because I contribute to AD, but dismissed it on the grounds of paranoia setting in - and the number of people confirming they too have had calls on Nom-Steer confirms to me I was right to do so.

Peter

 

[Whois-Search]

I didn't make the 3000 phone calls so I'm just guessing here. But I know for a fact people like Jay Daley have called a few domainers.

When its selected people at Nominet ringing selected Nominet members I have to wonder whats going on.

 

[Hazel Pegg]

I didn't make the 3000 phone calls so I'm just guessing here. But I know for a fact people like Jay Daley have called a few domainers.

When its selected people at Nominet ringing selected Nominet members I have to wonder whats going on.

They are trying to persuade people to vote?

They are checking that all members have received the voting papers?

They are being intelligent about which person phones which member 'cos no-one can be expected to make all 3000 phone calls?

Hazel

 

[Whois-Search]

Reminds me of the time during the general elections the Conservative's used to ring my old Grandma and ask if she wanted a car to take her to the polling station (which she accepted).........then she would vote Labour instead

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Reminds me of the time during the general elections the Conservative's used to ring my old Grandma and ask if she wanted a car to take her to the polling station (which she accepted).........then she would vote Labour instead

Did Grandma have good reasons or did she just do so to be contrary?

I'm still waiting to hear which proposed changes (detailed in which clauses) are a charter for corporate fat-cats & opportunistic carpetbaggers to loot the Nominet coffers?

Hazel

 

[olebean]

Only the mere ability to form any type of business creates the fatcat perception

 

[Whois-Search]

Did Grandma have good reasons or did she just do so to be contrary?

I'm still waiting to hear which proposed changes (detailed in which clauses) are a charter for corporate fat-cats & opportunistic carpetbaggers to loot the Nominet coffers?

Hazel

No, the Conservative's had nicer Cars or Labour didn't offer at all lol.

I thought we were the "opportunistic carpetbaggers" on here

As for the corporate fat-cats - Bob Gilbert is a corporate lawyer on £££,£££ not us.

How about 3.4 on:

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/9796_Memorandum_of_Association.pdf

 

[Brassneck]

They are trying to persuade people to vote?

They are checking that all members have received the voting papers?

They are being intelligent about which person phones which member 'cos no-one can be expected to make all 3000 phone calls?

Hazel

How do you define intelligent? I think the criteria for choosing who to phone should be transparent. I haven't received my phone call yet and I'm by no means the smallest tag holder.

I have asked a few other tag holders and it seems that the ones who haven't received calls are the ones who have already voted. Is that right? If so, should Nominet have access to voting records half way through the election?

Stephen.

 

[Hazel Pegg]

I have asked a few other tag holders and it seems that the ones who haven't received calls are the ones who have already voted. Is that right? If so, should Nominet have access to voting records half way through the election?

No it should not and I would be very surprised if it does. If you are suggesting that this is the case then I suggest that you contact Popularis (the guys running the ballot) and ask for an explanation. You are verging on not only accusing Nominet of serious impropriety, but also the independent company running the ballot. It tends to help your case if allegations of voting malpractice can be backed up by hard evidence.

Hazel

 

[Jay Daley]

I don't mind telling you that we are indeed trying to call as many members as possible. With 3,000 to call and some people whose data is not up to date this may not mean everyone, but we are trying.

Part of the call is to try and persuade people to vote, since the lack of participation is previous votes is a concern.

But part also is to try and discuss the issues with members and persuade people to vote in favour of the resolution.

And yes Hazel, is right we are splitting the calls up between us and yes I am phoning mainly the people I know, including domainers. Some people may have strong views on this and so getting a call from a more senior person who can discuss the issues in more detail just seems common sense.

 

[Hazel Pegg]

How about 3.4 on:

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/9796_Memorandum_of_Association.pdf

3.4 reads:

Other registry services

3.4 to provide, develop and promote any or all of the services of a registry, network information centre, network operations centre or issuing authority (including but not limited to the equivalent of any of the services listed in 3.1 to 3.3 (inclusive)) of any information technology identifier (‘ITI’) or information technology resource (‘ITR’) whether in existence now or in the future (including, but not limited to ENUM, domain names, telephone numbers, Internet protocol numbers, Autonomous System numbers, port allocations and digital object identifiers);

Which bit of the above do you have a problem with?

Hazel

 

[Jay Daley]

However at the end of the day its not going to matter how we vote is it?

With a voting rights allocation like this:

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/9807_Voting_Rights.pdf

It's going to be Pipex and Schuld that decide (even with the cap) as only 10% of members vote.

Andrew

You've had this explained several times in various postings and you still don't appear to have got it so please read this and see if it sinks in.

Under the old voting rules a company was capped at 10% of votes allocated. So theoretically they could have enough votes by themselves to defeat a 90% resolution. With a voting pattern that saw only 50% of possible votes used they had almost 20% of the actual voting power.

In the new system people are capped at 3% of the votes cast, not allocated. So no matter how many people vote, it still takes four of the largest members to stop a 90% resolution. With these rules, if the turnout is low then people with moderate holdings of domains, such as larger domainers, may end up with 1%, 2% or even 3% of the voting power.

Furthermore, the new calculation removes any rounding that used to unfavourably affect those with only a few domains. Now every domain counts and so smaller members can actually have an impact.

To give you some hypothetical figures. If 10% of the roughly 6.5m votes are cast then 1% is 5,000 domains and 3% is 15,000. If 20% of the roughly 6.5m votes are cast then 1% is 10,000. (Just trust me on the figures for now). Well within reach of some domainers.

This should not be dismissed in the way you suggest it is.

 

[Brassneck]

No it should not and I would be very surprised if it does. If you are suggesting that this is the case then I suggest that you contact Popularis (the guys running the ballot) and ask for an explanation. You are verging on not only accusing Nominet of serious impropriety, but also the independent company running the ballot. It tends to help your case if allegations of voting malpractice can be backed up by hard evidence.

Hazel

Only asking a question! Didn't make any accusations.

I think what seems to be clear is that there is a level of distrust between the nominet management and its members. I think Nominet could do with some expert advice on how to manage its communications better, because clearly many of its members are not on message yet either becauase they don't agree or because they haven't been persuaded properly.

Stephen.

 

[Whois-Search]

Jay,

Thanks for the explanations.

I still think you need to be Clive Feather to work all this lot out!

Before the Nominet phone calls I was expecting around 9%-11% of members to vote again. The same number as the AGM.

Now it's likely to be a landslide "Yes" vote. Even if Pipex votes "No" again like at the last EGM.

Andrew

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Only asking a question! Didn't make any accusations.

I'm glad to hear that. Apologies if I misunderstood your earlier message.

I think what seems to be clear is that there is a level of distrust between the nominet management and its members.

Hardly surprising after the fiasco that was EGM1. But many of us are attempting to build bridges and Nominet has clearly listened to the criticism about EGM1 and has now consulted and taken note of feedback prior to EGM2.

Hazel

 

[Whois-Search]

3.4 reads:

Other registry services

3.4 to provide, develop and promote any or all of the services of a registry, network information centre, network operations centre or issuing authority (including but not limited to the equivalent of any of the services listed in 3.1 to 3.3 (inclusive)) of any information technology identifier (‘ITI’) or information technology resource (‘ITR’) whether in existence now or in the future (including, but not limited to ENUM, domain names, telephone numbers, Internet protocol numbers, Autonomous System numbers, port allocations and digital object identifiers);

Which bit of the above do you have a problem with?

Hazel

Basically it gives the board the chance to do anything they like "registry" wise. How much will it cost to set up things like ENUM? Where will the money come from? The Nominet cash pile that was promised to be returned to members? If Nominet makes another cash pile via ENUM what will it do with that one?

Also whos paying for the 3000 phone calls? How longs a piece of string?

 

[Brassneck]

Jay,

Thanks for the explanations.

I still think you need to be Clive Feather to work all this lot out!

Before the Nominet phone calls I was expecting around 9%-11% of members to vote again. The same number as the AGM.

Now it's likely to be a landslide "Yes" vote. Even if Pipex votes "No" again like at the last EGM.

Andrew

Andrew

I think it may well be closer than you think. Amongst the small registrars and domainers I know, I would say that about 2/3 rds are voting no. Of course, how this works out when the big boys are included and the capping methodology is applied will be interesting to see.

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Jay,

Thanks for the explanations.

I still think you need to be Clive Feather to work all this lot out!

I scraped through what was called a Maths 0-Level back in the dark ages (and still can't do anything more complex than work out that I am overdrawn) but even I have managed to get a grasp of the new voting rights. I wouldn't have cast my vote in favour of the changes if I hadn't understood what I was voting for. So I put my mind to it and eventually understood things (though possibly not in a way that Clive Feather would appreciate).

I'm still finding it difficult to predict how things will work out at the EGM ballot - but that is because until the final number of votes cast is known it will be impossible to predict how big an influence the larger (capped) members will have on the final outcome.

Hazel