Nominet EGM proxy voting

[njf]

Objectives?

Hi Hazel et al,

Thanks for all the info.

The change to the Memorandum of Association point 3 looks to really muddy what Nominet's objectives are, rather than just simply add additional registry focussed operations conducive to the operation of the Internet (they read to be "our objectives are to do just about anything we see fit?", latitude seems massive in those clauses). The monkeying with clause numbering/protection is suspicious.

On the prices point - should the pressure to change prices be downwards, then I suspect the backing of the membership would be assured - so why the need for a change? Seems governance is needed by someone - the current situation looks fine if I understand correctly.

My reading is that a sledge hammer is being dropped from a great height on a walnut - or walnut cracking is not the true intention. Nominet appear to me to be a body I trust the national registry with - not sure I'd trust what they would turn into with these changes - so I'll be voting no^3.

All - thanks for the advice, Nick.

 

[EdPhillips]

So those people who only have the snail-mail version of the EGM resolutions have not been informed that what they are voting on has changed. The Nominet website was updated to reflect these renumberings in the course of today.

Hazel
This had occured to us and we aim to send a nom-announce out today - however, we had a few things to tidy up yesterday to make sure that there were no further problems

Confused?

That's the intention?
Hazel

I'm sorry if that's the impression. For what its worth, these are long and complicated documents and the final versions were only settled on very recently - and the fact is, we made a mistake.

By the end of today this should be resolved, and actually the changes made sound complicated when set out in full (z moves to x, x moves to y etc. etc.) but essentially they boil down to getting the references wrong.

I know you have a concern about whether clauses are protected by other clauses (and therefore require a 90% vote or 75% vote) and I'll try to deal with that separately.

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Hazel
This had occured to us and we aim to send a nom-announce out today - however, we had a few things to tidy up yesterday to make sure that there were no further problems

No nom-announce in my mailbox?

Hazel
www.notnominet.org.uk

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Hazel
I'm sorry if that's the impression. For what its worth, these are long and complicated documents and the final versions were only settled on very recently - and the fact is, we made a mistake.

Mistakes happen. Not usually on such an important issue :smile:

And I know the documents are long and complicated. I'm still annotating them on Notnominet.org.uk

Hazel
www.notnominet.org.uk

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Proxies

If anyone has a Proxy form they haven't yet sent off to the ERS then I'm going to attend the EGM in case anything unexpected needs voting on. Please give me your Proxy if you can't attend yourself (and assuming you trust me

Hazel
www.NOTnominet.org.uk

 

[Whois-Search]

Too much red tape - what a mess.

I'm just waiting for the DRS of notnominet.org.uk by Nominet !

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Too much red tape - what a mess.

I'm just waiting for the DRS of notnominet.org.uk by Nominet !

That could be fun

But I don't expect it to happen. Nominet rules allow sites that criticise others so long as they don't attempt to pass themselves off as others. It is pretty clear from my site that Nominet has nothing to do with the content and that I am not pretending to be Nominet. So no grounds for a DRS.

Hazel
www.NOTnominet.org.uk

 

[Whois-Search]

Keep up the good work Hazel.

I see they are still arguing on Nom-Steer

 

[olebean]

Hazel

If not Nominet what?

Its easy to suggest ideas against the status quo, sinse you want votes tell us... Anything new?

 

[Hazel Pegg]

If not Nominet what?

I'm not suggesting that we get rid of Nominet. I'm suggesting that we don't allow Nominet to change into something so far removed from the original as to be unrecognisable.

Its easy to suggest ideas against the status quo, sinse you want votes tell us... Anything new? ?

I'd like the current proposals that will be put to the EGM defeated. Not because I disagree with everything proposed - much of it is good. But because in order to accept the good we also have to accept some things that I see as unacceptable. So I'd like the proposals to change Nominet (some of which are desirable) to be brought back to the membership in less of a rush and after a reasonable consultation period.

If you scroll through NOTnominet.org.uk and just read my comments in orange you'll see where the bits are that I have problems with.

Hazel
www.NOTnominet.org.uk

 

[FC Domains]

I'd like the current proposals that will be put to the EGM defeated. Not because I disagree with everything proposed - much of it is good. But because in order to accept the good we also have to accept some things that I see as unacceptable.

Agreed.
I'll be voting against, but it will be a shame to see the good ideas lost.

 

[fred]

If anyone has a Proxy form they haven't yet sent off to the ERS then I'm going to attend the EGM in case anything unexpected needs voting on. Please give me your Proxy if you can't attend yourself (and assuming you trust me

Hazel
www.NOTnominet.org.uk

I see you made it onto theregister http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/21/nominet_egm/

 

[Hazel Pegg]

I see you made it onto theregister http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/21/nominet_egm/

And only a few factual errors in the article

Hazel
www.NOTnominet.org.uk

 

[FC Domains]

Why have I just got an email from Nominet that says:

We would like to take this opportunity to encourage all members to vote in
favour of the resolutions, which the Board unanimously recommends to you.


Am I misunderstanding something here?

 

[EdPhillips]

Why have I just got an email from Nominet that says:

We would like to take this opportunity to encourage all members to vote in
favour of the resolutions, which the Board unanimously recommends to you.


Am I misunderstanding something here?

Nominet's Board of Directors have proposed the changes, and they all think that they are a good idea. Nominet's directors are therefore asking you to vote in favour of the changes.

Hazel is on the Policy Advisory Board, which is a policy development committee which advises the Nominet Board on policy matters, but she is not a director of Nominet itself.

 

[FC Domains]

I still feel that this is very misleading, as it doesn't state which board. I had to look it up, to see that the email is from somebody who isn't on PAB.

Do those on PAB also have the ability to email all members? After all we did elect them.

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Hazel is on the Policy Advisory Board, which is a policy development committee which advises the Nominet Board on policy matters, but she is not a director of Nominet itself.

Correct.

Hazel
www.NOTnominet.org.uk

 

[Hazel Pegg]

Do those on PAB also have the ability to email all members?

No.

Hazel
www.NOTnominet.org.uk

 

[Whois-Search]

Don't worry I think more people read "The Register" than Nominet's announce emails !

Sites like slashdot.org and net4now.com should pick the story up soon

 

[texidriver]

Why have I just got an email from Nominet that says:

We would like to take this opportunity to encourage all members to vote in
favour of the resolutions, which the Board unanimously recommends to you.


Am I misunderstanding something here?

18 minutes,!!!!!!!
EdPhillips
do you not have something better to do than monitor this forum ?