Re: [ga] remote participation

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Marilyn and all remaining assembly members,

  I agree that there there shouldn't be any disincentive for folks to
attend ICANN meeting personally.  However the converse is also
true that remote participants should also not be disadvantaged.
Currently and thus far, remote participants have been disadvantaged
greatly.  Hence, it seems both logical and fair that Michael Froomkin's
suggestion be implemented and become policy.  It would serve potentially
two purposes IMHO.  First, it would put all participants on a equal basis,
which is fair.  Second, it would likely improve ICANN's participation,
implementation of remote participation technology, which would eventually
benefit all or the Internet Community, and it would improve vastly ICANN
image on a global basis.  Therefore I believe, as do our members, that
Michale Froomkin's suggestion has the potential of solving, at least to some
degree, the issue of disenfranchisement.

Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:

> While I support a better mechanism to include remote participation, the
> reality is that each meeting draws heavily from the local/regional
> community, and many people to make extraordinary efforts to attend and
> participate.
>
> Let's not create a disincentive for folks to make the effort to participate
> face to face in our efforts to improve remote participation.
>
> Marilyn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sotiropoulos [mailto:sotiris@hermesnetwork.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 4:26 PM
> Cc: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] Draft of Bylaws Recommendation concerning the
> GeneralAssembly
>
> "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" wrote:
> >
> > I have a very simple suggestion that is fair to everyone.  Please note in
> > reading what follows that I am serious about this.
> >
> > I think everyone, including the people physically present, should have to
> > submit comments via the 'remote' system and be subject to the same
> > filtering.  This will remove the otherwise highly unfair advantage that
> > wealth and physical proximity bring to attendees.  If the system of
> > handling remove comments is fair enough for remote participants, it should
> > be fair enough for physical participants.  If it is not, this system will
> > ensure that it quickly reaches that standard.
> >
> > Anything less is second-class status.
>
> Professor Froomkin, I completely agree with you on
> this wise.  Personally, I do not think any special
> emphasis should be placed on the so-called "ICANN
> Experience" of an in-person audience.  If
> anything, such emphasis serves to paint ICANN
> Meetings as some kind of travelling roadshow.
> There is simply too much at stake in ICANN to make
> exclusive allowances for the in-house audience, no
> matter what their presence at the meeting cost
> them.
>
> I think your proposed measure would go a long way
> in establishing a more level playing field within
> the instrumentality of ICANN Meetings, especially
> with regards to audience participation.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>         Hermes Network, Inc.
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html