Re: FW: [council] [ga] GA representation on the Names Council

["Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@dninet.net>]

the same points also make for logical reason as to why it may very well be
quite difficult to effect the at-large directorship elections. it is very
hard  to get a good handle on exactly whom the at-large constituancy may
constitute.

the most challenging  task ahead of us here may very well be to insure that
a truly diverse electorate participates in these critical elections.

this process too make take additional time to do in a fair , equitable
manner.

as katheryn states at her closing "A little more time is not a terrible
thing". This advice may very well ring true with respect to the at-large
directorships as well.

ken stubbs

----- Original Message -----
From: <KathrynKL@aol.com>
To: <klensin@mci.net>; <Dennis.Jennings@ucd.ie>
Cc: <council@dnso.org>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 4:40 PM
Subject: Re: FW: [council] [ga] GA representation on the Names Council


> John Klensin lists three options for the GA below.  I know he has thought
> long and hard about this subject, but there is also a 4th option:  for
groups
> that work with individuals to assist the GA in providing its own structure
> and vision.  There are grassroots membership organizations that work with
the
> sticky, messy issues of grassroots democracy that can provide considerable
> expertise and insight to the GA.
>
> While the NC may someday feel the need to provide leadership to the GA,
now
> is not the time.   As John Klensin points in his message below, "there are
> legitimate groups of people in the DNSO who are not represented in any
> constituency" and accordingly are not represented by the Names Council.
> These groups would view it very badly (as would the press and others I
think)
> if the Names Council stepped in too quickly to provide guidance or assert
> authority.
>
> I know that the GA seems as if it has been a disorganized for a long time.
> But we are just at the beginning of the ICANN Process.  Like the
> Noncommercial Constituency, the GA is a heterogeneous, international,
diverse
> group.  It will inevitably take a little longer to organize than those
with
> common commercial interests.
>
> A little more time is not a terrible thing.
> Kathy Kleiman
>
>
> klensin@MCI.NET writes:
> >
> >  As long as there are legitimate groups of people in the DNSO who
> >  are not represented in any constituency, the GA becomes their
> >  only voice and, as such, a separate body.    ......
>
> >  So, again, the question isn't whether or not that
> >  "randomly-chosen representation" model is a good idea.   It is
> >  which of the following three ideas you prefer:
> >
> >  * Randomly-chosen representation
> >  * Representation chosen by the GA.  This really entrenches them
> >  as a separate body and probably guarantees selection by the
> >  crazies.
> >  * Some rapid, decisive, and balanced action from the NC to
> >  reduce or eliminate the underlying problem.
> >
>