Subject: You left off my nominees!

From: Eric Weisberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 09:41:33 +0000

I am not talking about Neal Greenfield, Peter Ron and Dan Steinberg, but ALL
the rest I
nominated.  I am serious about this.  Everyone of them deserves
consideration.

Let me start with the remainder of the Boston Group whom you left off the
list.

The two guys from New Zealand ISOC and its TLD registry, DomaiNZ (I hope you

capitalize the last 2 letters)--PATRICK O'BRIEN and PETER DENGATE-THRUSH.
Very competent, very decent,  very fair.  Patrick has very broad industry
background, Peter is the lawyer.  They are as geographically diverse as you
can get.  I am VERY proud to know and nominate them.

DAVID SCHUTT--the computer guy for a  manufacturer of commercial meat
grinder parts, typical end-user,  interested in electronic commerce.  You
have all seen his posts to this list. A really good guy.  I was proud to
nominate him.  We need him on the board.

But, I am proud of every one of the others I mentioned, as well.

DAVE CROCKER has gotten a lot of heat, so be it. He is a damned good man, he
has a tremendous store of knowledge, his "side" (whatever that is) is not
posting on this issue,  and he will have a lot to offer any board in the
formative stages of governance.  As with Dan Steinberg, he will rub people
the wrong way from time to time, but we are engaged
in serious conversation and we have real disagreements.  We only have a few
options.  We can  elect a board which discusses golf and lets the staff set
policy, or we put the strongest players on the field and let the competing
ideas fight it out.  The latter, in my opinion will get us the best
governance.  Dave Crocker is definitely one of my nominees.

KENT CRISPEN, WERNER STAUB, KEN STUBBS are others whom I previously
nominated, along with DON HEATH and BARB DOOLEY.  They do not need my
introduction.  I am proud to have nominated them.

What about DAVE FARBER?  He is a wonderful man.  He loves the Internet as
any parent loves a child.  He is good as gold.  He is a participant in the
IFWP.  I nominated him.

If you go down the membership list, you will find an impressive array of
people.  Everyone of us is qualified to serve on the board and is
nominated.  If we use the
the system suggested by Jim Dixon called SINGLE TRANSFERABLE VOTE (STV),
all can be candidates.   We will rank our choices (as many as there are open
positions) in order of preference and the computer will weigh our consensus
as to each.  We will get an excellent result.

However, there are a few things we need to do, first.

We need to decide how many seats there will actually be.  The Boston Group
adopted
the IANA/NSI proposal of starting with 9 "at large" representatives noting
that we may
want to increase that number if we were not going to have an additional 9 SO
representatives and the President is not also a member of the board .  We
did not want
to get into an argument over how many is too much.  Is 9 the right sized
board, or do we
really need more people to assure diversity?

And, we need a system of voting.   Will anyone step up to the plate on that?

We do not have much time.  We need to get organized before the "fait" is
"compli."

Eric Weisberg, Gen. Counsel
Internet Texoma

Please think this through.   I think you will agree.

Eric

Bob Allisat wrote:

>  http://fcn.net/nominations.html
>
>  A current list of nominations
>  derived from IFWP discussions
>  is available at this URL. All
>  participants are welcome to
>  enter into this open, public
>  process. To join the process
>  please follow the instruction
>  included below.
>
> >From http://www.americas.ifwp.org/lists.htm:
> > DISCUSSION LISTS
> >
> > [email-masked] - For ongoing discussion of the GIAW results and the
> > IFWP process as a whole.
> >
> > To SUBSCRIBE to the IFWP list, send a BLANK email message to
> > [email-masked]
> >
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE to the IFWP list, send a BLANK email message to
> > [email-masked]
> >
> > To view the ARCHIVES of this list, go to:
> >
> > http://lists.interactivehq.org/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=ifwp
> > (username=ifwp, password=ifwp).
> >
> > Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [email-masked]
> > or call +1 202 408 0008.
>
>  Respectfully,
>
>  Bob Allisat
>
>  Free Community Network . [email-masked] . http://fcn.net
>
> __________________________________________________
> To view the archive of this list, go to:
> http://lists.interactivehq.org/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=ifwp
>
> To receive the digest version instead, send a
> blank email to [email-masked]
>
> To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
> [email-masked]
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
> [email-masked]
>
> Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [email-masked].
> ___END____________________________________________

---

From: Eric Weisberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 09:41:33 +0000

Eric

---

From: "David Schutt" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 10:28:17 -0500

Thanks Eric, but there is no way that I am qualified to be on this board.
Most of the others that you mentioned are, though, and should be considered.

David Schutt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Eric Weisberg
> Sent: Sunday, September 27, 1998 4:42 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: [dnsproc-en] You left off my nominees!
>
> <snip>
>

---

From: "David Schutt" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 10:28:17 -0500

David Schutt

---

From: Eric Weisberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 11:18:03 +0000

WRONG.  If you are not qualified, none of us is.  I can not imagine a better
steward of our trust.  I do not withdraw your nomination and ask that you
reconsider my request that you be available for consideration should the
community
wish your service.

---

From: Eric Weisberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 11:18:03 +0000

---

From: Ron Fitzherbert <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 13:25:07 -0400 (EDT)

You may have hit the nail on the head there --- "none of us is".  Anyone
who has in any way been involved with the dns issues (or the Internet) for
that matter may not be qualified to be a trustee of the dns space.
Everyone brings some sort of baggage (good or bad) who is/was involved in
any of this.

Although I would welcome the chance myself to be on the board, and I
probably have nearly as good qualifications as anyone else -- am I REALLY
qualified to be totally impartial and do what is right and fair?  I would
like to think that I am, or that anyone else is for that matter, however I
am sure I already have biases.

It would be unique, it would be scary, it might be a terrible mistake --
but I would like to see 12 (or however many really needed) random people
selected -- not from a pool of "interested" people, rather from a pool of
"all" people.

The Internet belongs no no one person or group of people, it doesn't even
belong to just the people who now have access -- why not select the board
from this group of people rather than from a very small subset?

If we are going to only select from a group of "elite" as chosen be us the
also "elite" then I suggest that Jon be the sole member of the board so we
can at least be assured that things will get done and there will be
continuity (assuming that is what we are trying to accomplish).

Ron

  ---------------- Ronald J. Fitzherbert, President ---------------
                           PENGUIN.NET(sm)
              Arlington, Virginia & Austin, Texas  (USA)
  -------------------- http://www.penguin.net/ --------------------

---

From: Ron Fitzherbert <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 13:25:07 -0400 (EDT)

Ron

  ---------------- Ronald J. Fitzherbert, President ---------------
                           PENGUIN.NET(sm)
  -------------------- http://www.penguin.net/ --------------------