Re: [ga] Position Paper for your consideration

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

On 19:06 30/09/01, DannyYounger@cs.com said:
>We agree with the assessment of the ALSC that the ASO and PSO, in general,
>seem to be functioning well, and submit that there would be no apparent
>justification for any changes either in their structure or in their degree of
>representation on the Board.

I am afraid, Danny, that I absolutely oppose that. PSO should only tell 
people the nr of the line their protocol has been recorded in. But mission 
creep is here instead of cross-fertilization catalysis as we observe it. We 
can say that the Internet protocols do not match the Internet architecture 
in term of user autonomy and security. IRT ASO, the lack of education, 
concern and involvement of the Global Internet Community through @large or 
a ASO/GA will probably result in a dramatic situation for real of several 
magnitudes more important that the fake DNS debate. Billions of cost for 
centuries, blocking of the Network, multiple BigBrothers, major innovation 
delays, ...

So what we can say is that @large presence at SO through a GA is of the 
essence. An SO must be conceived as a governance structure with 
participating constituencies, council, GA, Secretariat, MLs, site, etc...

Jefsey

--
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