[agenda] RE: Re[2]: [ga] RE: Recall of GA Chair

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

|> From: William X Walsh [mailto:william@userfriendly.com]
|> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 2:12 PM
|> 
|> Thursday, Thursday, October 04, 2001, 2:08:13 PM, Patrick 
|> Greenwell wrote:

|> > I'm not certain if the complaint or one or two individuals 
|> raises this to
|> > the level of a "problem" of the GA.
|> 
|> 
|> Lack of complaint doesn't eliminate the fact that the GA has been
|> absolutely unproductive since this chair took office.  That is the
|> problem.

The GA has been absolutely unproductive since its inception, period. It
always has been. The DNSO NC isn't much better, as has been reported in
WG-Review. Where is this particular instance any different? This could lead
one to the conclusion that changing leadership would not improve things one
iota and that it would be, in fact, deconstructive.

The real problem is that we have no focus because we, in fact, have nothing
credible to focus on. Whereever we may place our focus is blured because we
have no capability/authority to create a direct effect. Nothing the GA does
is presented without suitable spin, by the NC and ICANN BoD. From a
management perspective, this makes it difficult for GA members to get up a
lot of enthusiasm for any particular point. To then blame this on the
current chair is both grossly unfair and ludicrous. He didn't create this
environment and neither did his predecessors.

What is well documented is that the previous approach wasn't working. I, for
one, am willing to see him try a different approach, the fruit of which
hasn't had time to ripen yet.

What you are doing here is like the kid in a car on a long trip. The answer
is, "no, we aren't there yet!" and please quit distracting the driver.