[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[council] Some reality (was Re: [ga] DNSO Expenses)
Bret,
I am not answering to the ga list, as I have to run the election system
all the next week, starting today, with 5 telecons, and the responsabilty
to all ICANN/DNSO community to have it well done.
I will work many hours each day, and will certainly not have time
for debate, in a system giving too much weight to a noise and
last word. So for a caveat.
Lets continue with substance related to the subject.
May I suggest you to verify with the current secretariat --
volountary -- the real cost before the GA move into demagogy ?
It is so easy on this list.
I commited to do a volountary job in Berlin, I am not complaining.
I am working myself, sometimes when on business trips with
the help of AFNIC maintenance team. More than 8 hours a day
including weekend (it is Saturday morning now here), dedicated
to DNSO matters -- server, NC, telecons, minutes, agendas,
minutes, verifications, website, various mailing lists, some
with censor action (manual -- council list is archived, but
without phone numbers), election.
The ga list is screeming because I do not work the whole CET night
(which is California day) and sleep sometimes.
The hardware matters may be considered no issue -- one time expense,
$US 8000, AFNIC support for ICANN/DNSO.
The system maintainance and connectivity are cheap, as added
to the company working item. But just for your information it includes
skills on routers, security access list, verifications of monitoring
logs, modems, permanent backups, etc. There are humans behind,
no matter how automated it is.
Please do not forget that the demand of "at least 10 years archivig"
has a cost (I was working on space program, longterm archiving is
horrendous cost, includes passing info on former operation systems,
formats, former softwares, ... ten years ago in computers is ancien Greeks).
Your estimate about $US 750 is simply a fiction.
At CENTR (23 European disciplinate members, sometimes fighting
but no permanent bad faith, professionals), we have full time
secretariat, and she is not unemployed.
Last but not the less expensive: noisy lunatics setting up fiction
caracters stories (it is so easy, human invetions are endless)
and writing to different lists and treataining you with demagogy,
with cc to US Congres, US Whitehouse, ... etc. Not just one posting
in a while but a permanent strong noise, forbidding others cultures,
not native English speakers (and even those complains) to even catch
with the subjects.
All this demagogical fighters for democracy and for allowing cross-posting
are not sitting at the DNSO secretariat, and did not see that when few
weeks ago somebody on GA started voting on a hot potato issue with CC
to yet another noisy list, I received hundreds of nonsense
answers (nonsense because witnessing other list traffic myself I know
there was no slightest explanation on vote and vote conditions, those
peoples were voting like supporters of football teams).
Good news - from time to time I receive a really worm
support for keeping order in the DNSO, and trying to have
work conditions here. From Americans.
I belive it is a little like childres education: they need absolutely
to know limites, and it is parents responsability to not abandon
the difficulty of setting limits and let them do everything.
The equilibrum. The responsability of both sides.
As I said to my CENTR collegues recently, but it is appropriate
here:
> This election is like a consensus -- the voters shall know
> to weight between noise and content, between appearance and
> substance, between the visible and invisible part of an iceberg.
The bottom line: the mesure of silence on the list.
In the US it is approuval. In Europe it is not, depending sometimes
on the context. I do not know much about Asians, but would say
it is closest to Europe than US. Europe is not homogenous.
Latins are very sensitive to matters of honour. Etc.
We need to find out a way in which it can be an International
forum, respecting everybody. Respecting every culture.
Respecting working conditions. Respecting precious time.
Regards,
Elisabeth
NB. I put council@dnso.org in CC: Many knowledgable persons here.
> From owner-ga@dnso.org Fri Oct 8 05:30 MET 1999
> Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 20:27:50 -0700
> Subject: [ga] DNSO Expenses
> From: "Bret A. Fausett" <baf@fausett.com>
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Mime-version: 1.0
> X-Priority: 3
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
>
> If we're not careful, the DNSO could become excessively expensive.
>
> We now have nine discrete components within the DNSO: seven
> constituencies, a Names Council, and a General Assembly. Many of the seven
> constituencies now have, or are in the process of creating, their own
> "secretariat" to provide necessary support. And recent threads have
> proposed the creation of a General Assembly "AdCom" to support and unify
> the GA. All of these separate supporting groups will come at some cost to
> the DNSO's members.
>
> Many of us active on this list were involved in drafting various proposals
> to create the DNSO. One of the themes of many proposals was that the DNSO
> should be "lightweight." As we continue to build the DNSO's
> infrastructure, that theme is worth remembering. If we build in too many
> layers of bureaucracy, we may move the cost of participation beyond the
> reach of many small and individual stakeholders. I think it's safe to say
> that the vast majority of people on this list would like to see ICANN and
> the DNSO succeed and are willing to contribute the time and money to make
> that possible. Let's make sure that the monetary contribution we seek from
> participants is within a reasonable range.
>
> To that end, let me suggest two things that I hope can keep our costs
> under control. First, rather than creating and funding nine different
> "secretariats" to support each of the DNSO's bodies, could we create one
> secretariat that would provide support to *all* of the DNSO? Surely there
> will be efficiencies in coordinating the support function across all
> constituencies, the NC, and the GA.
>
> Second, can we specify the support services that we need and seek
> volunteers to provide them? A list of necessary services begins with:
>
> * web hosting,
> * web maintenance (for each of the 9 bodies)
> * mailing list services (for each of the 9 bodies)
> * voting support
> * drafting of announcements,
> * teleconference support for the NC, and
> * webcasting for NC and GA meetings.
>
> I'm sure this is only a partial list. Some of these are trivial, and some
> are significant. But in whatever form they come, in kind contributions to
> the DNSO should be welcomed. Many participants, I'm sure, who would be
> more than willing to provide free webmaster/list owner support would find
> annual constituency dues of US $750 onerous. A small "secretariat" could
> serve to coordinate these volunteers.
>
> The two suggestions above may not be the right solution, but I urge
> everyone to consider the cost issue as we move forward.
>
> -- Bret
>
>
>