daytonos.com rapport :   Visitez le site

Données techniques du daytonos.com

Geo IP vous fournit comme la latitude, la longitude et l'ISP (Internet Service Provider) etc. informations. Notre service GeoIP a trouvé l'hôte daytonos.com.Actuellement, hébergé dans United States et son fournisseur de services est 1&1 Internet Inc. .

the related websites

domaine	Titre
daytonos.com	daytonos

Analyse d'en-tête HTTP

Les informations d'en-tête HTTP font partie du protocole HTTP que le navigateur d'un utilisateur envoie à appelé Apache contenant les détails de ce que le navigateur veut et acceptera de nouveau du serveur Web.

DNS

HtmlToText

comments posts home about contact citizenstogether.com from the vaults from the vaults select month june 2018 (3) may 2018 (5) april 2018 (4) march 2018 (2) february 2018 (6) december 2017 (1) november 2017 (1) october 2017 (6) september 2017 (1) august 2017 (2) july 2017 (2) may 2017 (4) april 2017 (1) march 2017 (2) february 2017 (5) january 2017 (1) december 2016 (2) november 2016 (1) october 2016 (6) september 2016 (1) august 2016 (3) may 2016 (1) april 2016 (1) december 2015 (1) february 2015 (2) october 2014 (10) april 2014 (3) march 2014 (2) february 2014 (1) january 2014 (7) december 2013 (1) october 2013 (2) september 2013 (2) july 2013 (1) may 2013 (3) april 2013 (2) october 2012 (9) september 2012 (6) august 2012 (3) april 2012 (5) march 2012 (5) february 2012 (11) january 2012 (1) december 2011 (4) november 2011 (14) october 2011 (17) september 2011 (18) august 2011 (18) july 2011 (5) june 2011 (7) may 2011 (10) april 2011 (9) march 2011 (13) february 2011 (9) january 2011 (9) december 2010 (11) november 2010 (6) october 2010 (5) september 2010 (5) august 2010 (12) july 2010 (22) june 2010 (25) may 2010 (21) april 2010 (12) march 2010 (10) february 2010 (7) january 2010 (10) december 2009 (14) november 2009 (11) october 2009 (23) september 2009 (19) august 2009 (26) july 2009 (40) june 2009 (34) may 2009 (33) april 2009 (58) march 2009 (56) february 2009 (63) january 2009 (72) december 2008 (79) november 2008 (110) october 2008 (114) september 2008 (102) august 2008 (96) july 2008 (50) june 2008 (80) may 2008 (134) april 2008 (145) march 2008 (197) february 2008 (67) january 2008 (60) december 2007 (78) november 2007 (32) october 2007 (34) september 2007 (23) august 2007 (21) july 2007 (9) june 2007 (8) may 2007 (6) april 2007 (6) march 2007 (7) february 2007 (4) at the mcdp reorganization meeting, the central committee votes to make no change in endorsement policies by mike bock , on june 7th, 2018 last evening was the quadrennial mcdp reorganization meeting. my five proposed changes to the mcdp constitution (see below) received strong support by some members, but in the end all proposed changes were all handily defeated. the most revealing part of the evening happened when a long-time member of the central committee said that she was insulted that anyone would dare to take away her right to a secret ballot. she had quite a head of steam expressing her indignation. she said that she was totally opposed to requiring her to sign a ballot. in the discussion that followed, several members reminded her that the central committee is a representative body and the democrats in her precinct who elected her to the committee have a right to know how she votes. this member is mistaken, because the central committee must abide by the rules stated in the ohio revised code. but it is understandable, however, why she feels she had a right to a secret vote. that’s the way the mcdp operates. i made a motion to make a roll-call vote for proposed changes to the constitution. i had prepared a handy ballot that required a signature — a roll-call ballot — and my motion was to use this ballot. (the ballot the chairman owens approved whited out the “reasons.”) my motion to have a roll call vote was defeated, but a good number, i’d say a least one-third, of those voting supported the motion. voting to not make the reorganization meeting transparent meant that the constitution amendment to require transparency concerning endorsements also would surely fail. these proposals to change the mcdp constitution stem from the disastrous decision of the party to make an endorsement in the rev ward vs rev fairchild contest. this endorsement needlessly divided democrats, needlessly divided the party, needless spent money. this audacious decision on the part of the screening committee and the rubber stamping of this decision on part of central committee follows an established history of unwise and unproductive endorsements. i believe if transparency concerning endorsements was required by the mcdp constitution, many unwise endorsements would be avoided. secrecy empowers bad decisions. in practical terms, the ward / fairchild endorsement decision was a secret vote — there was no record kept of who voted for endorsement, who voted against and who didn’t vote — and, as the indignant central committee member pointed out, some members of the central committee feel pretty entitled to secrecy. preamble: “we the representatives of the democrats living in montgomery county — in order to form a strong party organization that empowers representative democracy within our party and throughout the county — do establish the montgomery county democratic party constitution.” if i could have a do-over for the evening, i would ask for a separate vote on this preamble. i wrote this preamble as a proposal for discussion — i circulated it in a letter to central committee members, but there was never any discussion. these words were approved as written at the short meeting of the “constitution committee.” the words were highlighted in the xerox of the revised constitution that everyone at reorganization received, indicating that it was new text, but nobody at the reorganization meeting suggested the preamble should be discussed. i should have pressed the point. this preamble advances a point of view that contradicts the pov of a central committee that would reject a motion for roll-call vote. a debate likely would have resulted in tabling the preamble or referring it to a committee, so i said nothing. that was a mistake. the preamble should have been debated. the underlying premise of the preamble is that when the party empowers representative democracy and when it holds itself to the high standards of transparency expected of a representative body, it is a stronger party. this premise is the crux of what the democratic party should be debating. i don’t think that the democratic party can become the strong party it must become — unless it changes its ways and commits to operating as a small-d democratic organization that is responsible to its constituents. the place for the transformation needed in the democratic party to begin is at the county level. the reorganization meeting demonstrated how difficult it is to start the process. the outcome of quadrennial reorganization meetings depends on who shows up. first of all, over 60% of the precincts in montgomery county failed to elect a member on the committee, so if everyone elected showed up at this meeting, the central committee would not come close to representing the county’s 60,000 democrats. as a representative body, it is a failure from the get-go because of this lack of numbers. of the 93 people at the meeting (26% of the total precincts in the county), a big part were old-timers but there were a lot of new people. i’m guessing at least one-half of the group was new. the argument for voting “no” that prevailed was that the proposed changes to the constitution dealing with endorsements are not needed — after all, the mcdp operates according to roberts’ rules — and that a constitution should not needlessly constrict the options available to the organization. i argued that history shows that the mcdp needs a constitution that will establish guardrails to prevent big endorsement mistakes. requiring transparency on endorsement votes would provide the needed guardrails. i was glad that a number of members rose to emphasize the same or similar points. by big majorities — there is no record of how each member voted, of course — the reorganization meeting agreed to give the mcdp the option of continuing these past bad practices: central committee members may be expected to ratify or reject endorsement recommendations the same evening they are made. (no time to consult with constituents.) the central committee may continue to make endorsements for the democratic primary contests two months before the deadline for candidates to file with the board of

Analyse PopURL pour daytonos.com

http://daytonos.com/?feed=rss2
http://daytonos.com/?p=14145
http://daytonos.com/?p=14222
http://daytonos.com/?page_id=46
http://daytonos.com/?p=13980&cpage=1#comment-343626
http://daytonos.com/?p=13933
http://daytonos.com/?p=1832&cpage=1#comment-343022
http://daytonos.com/?p=6928&cpage=1#comment-326166
http://daytonos.com/?p=14161
http://daytonos.com/?author=13
http://daytonos.com/?feed=comments-rss2
http://daytonos.com/?page_id=156
http://daytonos.com/?p=14192#respond
http://daytonos.com/?cat=35
http://daytonos.com/?p=14202

Informations Whois

Whois est un protocole qui permet d'accéder aux informations d'enregistrement.Vous pouvez atteindre quand le site Web a été enregistré, quand il va expirer, quelles sont les coordonnées du site avec les informations suivantes. En un mot, il comprend ces informations;

Domain Name: DAYTONOS.COM
Registry Domain ID: 647466012_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.1and1.com
Registrar URL: http://registrar.1and1.info
Updated Date: 2017-10-27T07:34:21Z
Creation Date: 2006-10-26T17:52:44Z
Registry Expiry Date: 2018-10-26T17:52:44Z
Registrar: 1&1 Internet SE
Registrar IANA ID: 83
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse@1and1.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.6105601459
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Name Server: NS-US.1AND1-DNS.COM
Name Server: NS-US.1AND1-DNS.DE
Name Server: NS-US.1AND1-DNS.ORG
Name Server: NS-US.1AND1-DNS.US
DNSSEC: unsigned
URL of the ICANN Whois Inaccuracy Complaint Form: https://www.icann.org/wicf/
>>> Last update of whois database: 2017-10-31T02:14:44Z <<<

For more information on Whois status codes, please visit https://icann.org/epp

NOTICE: The expiration date displayed in this record is the date the
registrar's sponsorship of the domain name registration in the registry is
currently set to expire. This date does not necessarily reflect the expiration
date of the domain name registrant's agreement with the sponsoring
registrar. Users may consult the sponsoring registrar's Whois database to
view the registrar's reported date of expiration for this registration.

TERMS OF USE: You are not authorized to access or query our Whois
database through the use of electronic processes that are high-volume and
automated except as reasonably necessary to register domain names or
modify existing registrations; the Data in VeriSign Global Registry
Services' ("VeriSign") Whois database is provided by VeriSign for
information purposes only, and to assist persons in obtaining information
about or related to a domain name registration record. VeriSign does not
guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a Whois query, you agree to abide
by the following terms of use: You agree that you may use this Data only
for lawful purposes and that under no circumstances will you use this Data
to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass
unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via e-mail, telephone,
or facsimile; or (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes
that apply to VeriSign (or its computer systems). The compilation,
repackaging, dissemination or other use of this Data is expressly
prohibited without the prior written consent of VeriSign. You agree not to
use electronic processes that are automated and high-volume to access or
query the Whois database except as reasonably necessary to register
domain names or modify existing registrations. VeriSign reserves the right
to restrict your access to the Whois database in its sole discretion to ensure
operational stability. VeriSign may restrict or terminate your access to the
Whois database for failure to abide by these terms of use. VeriSign
reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.

The Registry database contains ONLY .COM, .NET, .EDU domains and
Registrars.

  REGISTRAR 1&1 Internet SE

SERVERS

  SERVER com.whois-servers.net

  ARGS domain =daytonos.com

  PORT 43

  TYPE domain
RegrInfo
DOMAIN

  NAME daytonos.com

  CHANGED 2017-10-27

  CREATED 2006-10-26

STATUS
clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited

NSERVER

  NS-US.1AND1-DNS.COM 217.160.82.2

  NS-US.1AND1-DNS.DE 217.160.80.2

  NS-US.1AND1-DNS.ORG 217.160.83.2

  NS-US.1AND1-DNS.US 217.160.81.2

  REGISTERED yes

Erreurs

La liste suivante vous montre les fautes d'orthographe possibles des internautes pour le site Web recherché.