Re: [ga] Does someone knows the REAL rules?

["William S. Lovell" <wsl@cerebalaw.com>]

Jefsey Morfin wrote:

{private]

Dear Joana,
I read your long mail in detail. As it is a follow-up on Bill's mails it
makes my ego to look the bad guy of the GA, while I am probably
one of the few supportive one.

Jefsey:

You have indeed been helpful at times, but undirected references
to "people wanting to enforce their own conceptions" indeed
deserve a good whack up 'long side the head.  Show me one
place wherein any attempt was made to enforce the BP.  You
must really have got up on the wrong side of the bed.

> This is the second time you create that type of confusion
> using
> out of context other's quote,
The thing is, Jefsey, you didn't give any context -- that was an
unjustified broadside -- asserting charges of having tried to
"enforce" something when even a casual review of the BP
documents published and commented on so far belies any
such claim.  If you have something constructive to say about
the BP, let's hear from you.
> so now I am trained :-)  I wish only to
> underline that Bill's comment from 8/15 is on a mail of mine from
> ... 9/7.  Don't you think it is unfair practice?
No, that occurs when one has been putting in hours and hours of
hard work on a constructive project, and it is only in a break
between Parts II and III that one has a chance even to skim
hundreds of emails, and respond to just a very few. Emails are
immortal, didn't you know?

And speaking of hard work, not to mention creativity, Joanna
jumped in on some ill-formed notions of mine about proposals,
and (as attorneys are wont todo) soon had a labyrinthic structure
that Solomon could not have understood: Joanna took that in hand
and reduced it to the extraordinary simplicity that the BP now has,
particularly adding the three "BASIS" lines and the color scheme.

That BASIS, I might add, is the critical distinction between the usual
half-cocked, ad hoc flurry of so-called "motions' that have plagued
the GA for years -- there must instead be a FOUNDATION, there
must be EVIDENCE, there must be CAUSE AND EFFECT REASONING,
before anyone that matters will pay the slightest attention to anything
that the GA produces. (On this, listen to Peter de Blanc as to such
requirements.)

But not to his response to Joanna -- she is right in stating that she
has no vested interest to protect here, nor for that matter do I.
We are just two people who were appalled at how the GA had
been conducting itself for years, and decided between us to try
to set out a better scheme.  If the GA membership fails to see an
opportunity at least to do something about that (of which, as has
been repeatedly stated, the BP is only a first shot at some semblance
of order) but insists instead on perpetuating its eternal tub thumping,
it hardly deserves any help at all.

Bill Lovell
 

 

Jefsey

On 01:35 16/08/01, Joanna Lane said:
>on 8/15/01 3:28 PM, William S. Lovell at wsl@cerebalaw.com wrote:
>
> > Jefsey:
> >
> > I believe the answer is that there are none. That's why issues have
> > been bouncing back and forth for years with no results.  Since the
> > ICANN documents say that the GA is to "self-organize" so as to
> > be able to create "bottom-up" policy suggestions, and since one
> > must have some set of rules by which to do that, that is what we
> > are doing: we are self-organizing a set of rules.
> >
> > And nothing is being "enforced": the GA has the choice of
> > continuing to waller in babble for a few more years, or of
> > adopting some clear cut means for arriving at decisions.  The
> > Best Practices draft sets out (or will, when Parts III and IV
> > are finished) such a clear cut means.
> >
> > Bill Lovell
> >
> > Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> >
> >> On 21:38 09/07/01, Joanna Lane said:
> >>> according to our BEST PRACTICES Draft Document
> >>
> >> Could someone tell me where I can find the REAL rules in use?
> >>
> >> I only hear from people wanting to enforce their own conceptions.
> >> Jefsey

--
Any terms above that are not familiar to the reader may
possibly be explained at:
"WHAT IS": http://whatis.techtarget.com/
GLOSSARY: http://www.icann.org/general/glossary.htm
Archives of posted emails on various General Assembly
mailing lists and other ICANN information can be found at:
http://www.dnso.org/archives.html