Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] REVISED Proposal-support poll

[Jeff Eckhaus <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Tim on this on an objection to nongroup members. If this was a 
poll on IRTP or RAP or some other ICANN acronym then the risks of ballot 
stuffing would be slim to none. But with a highly debated issue the risks are 
high and not worth the headache it would cause. 



----- Original Message -----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx <owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Mike O'Connor <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>; owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
<owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>; Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Fri Jun 11 15:25:03 2010
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] REVISED Proposal-support poll


I object. It would make the poll meaningless. There would be no way to confirm 
who is who. But if we go that route I'd like a day or two notice so I can get 
the word out to all of our staff :)

Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 17:05:57 
To: Avri Doria<avri@xxxxxxx>
Cc: <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] REVISED Proposal-support poll


as your co-chair and scribe, i don't have any objection to others taking the 
poll.  but it would make my life a lot easier if they indicated that they are 
not WG members when they fill out their entry so i can tell who is who when i 
summarize the poll.  i admit, i worry a little bit about craziness and pranks, 
but i'm willing to wait and cross that bridge if we come to it.

Roberto?  you have any thoughts either way on this?

mikey


On Jun 11, 2010, at 4:43 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> that is what I have assumed it meant all along. 
> silly me.
> 
> of course doodle only has 3 states as far as i know.
> 
> by the way any objection to people not on the VI list, but who have been 
> following,  taking the poll?
> 
> Also we have more than 25 members on the VI list.  where are the others?
> 
> 
> 
> a.
> 
> On 11 Jun 2010, at 16:04, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Too late now, but in retrospect, a fourth option of "I could accept this 
>> WITH some modification" might have been interesting. I would have included 
>> JN2 in that category, as an example.
>> 
>> Alan
>> 
>> At 10/06/2010 04:39 PM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>> 
>>> i so horked up the poll i decided to redo it.  same URL, but i deleted the 
>>> 4 answers that were there -- so please revisit the poll if you filled it 
>>> out.  apologies for that.
>>> 
>>>      http://www.doodle.com/3pzabi8d9frrpvb7
>>> 
>>> thanks,
>>> 
>>> mikey
>>> - - - - - - - - -
>>> phone   651-647-6109
>>> fax             866-280-2356
>>> web     www.haven2.com
>>> handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, 
>>> etc.)
>> 
> 

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)