[ga] Re: Complaint

["babybows.com" <webmaster@babybows.com>]

Sotiris has asked why the final report of the WG-review is mentioned nowhere
in any of the official DNSO website references (that he considers the 15
Jan. report to be a farce is another issue - personally, I consider the
Jan.15 report to be valid and the NC Task Force report to be a farce).  To
put it plainly, the Names Council officially decommissioned the WG-review
some time ago and shut down its mailing list, and the most recent effort of
the remaining members of WG-review (posted in the Public Comment Forum at
http://forum.icann.org/cgi-bin/rpgmessage.cgi?dnsoreview1;3ADB39BF00000043 )
, can only be regarded as work-product from "other sources" (to quote Board
resolution 01.28).  As the NC does not consider this to be official
work-product, and as the Board does not consider this to be "official"
work-product, and as we of the General Assembly have only limited control
over what gets posted to the DNSO website, it is somewhat obvious that the
final report of the WG-review would not be mentioned anywhere on the DNSO
website.

That, however, does not negate the stalwart efforts of this group, which has
now been afforded the opportunity to go beyond their most recent
recommendations.

The unofficial WG-review recommended that the Board immediately begin
seeking proposals for the implementation and self-organization of an
Individual's Constituency, proposing that the Board issue notice that
proposals for such a constituency may be submitted for consideration,
thereby encouraging individual domain name holders to self-organize and
submit proposals.
Personally, I don't believe that those that seek to establish an
Individuals' Constituency should need such "encouragement" by the Board.
Either they act to become a viable constituency and pull themselves up by
their own bootstraps, or they fail to demonstrate to the Board why having
such a constituency is in the best interests of the Corporation.  Either
way, the burden of proof, of legitimacy, is on their shoulders.
The Board, at some point, may become receptive to the idea of an
individuals' constituency.  But it is not enough to simply recommend to the
Board that they become more enchanted with the concept.  Give them reasons.
Give them a defined charter.  Give them a proposal that deals with the
complexities of meeting funding requirements (especially at a time when
other constituencies may soon find their votes to be in jeopardy).  Prove to
them that such a body can truly be representative.    Use the ga-review list
to marshal your arguments so that the GA may act to fully support a
consensus resolution based on the merits.
You seek to have "official" notice of your efforts?  Work in conjunction
with the NC Committee tasked with setting the terms of reference for ongoing
DNSO Review.  Collaborate.  Offer the work-product of a GA committee
supported by a GA resolution.  You'll get more accomplished by working
within the system than by working through mailing lists outside of the
organization.
Yes, there have been problems with NC reports... that much has been
acknowledged by members of the Board in Melbourne.  This too will change for
the better.   We have the opportunity to chart the way forward, to properly
engage in the preparation of a draft document within the context of a
research committee of the General Assembly.  Use this chance to come to a
consensus-based conclusion that deals with issues such as the "criteria"
that may affect the acceptance of a proposed constituency, that contends
with the" procedures" necessary to obtain Board approval.

There is much yet to be done.  It is not sufficient to merely state that an
individuals' constituency is something wanted by the DNSO.  Many of us
wanted a certain Option in the Versign contract discussions; we were
overruled by a Board that did not consider our arguments to be sufficiently
of merit.  Prove your case. Justify your positions.  Document the extent of
your outreach in arriving at a conclusion, and couple that with a favorable
vote by the NC and you might have a better chance of achieving your goals.



--
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