ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] The "Precondition" Argument for an Individuals Constitue ncy


Roeland and all assembly members,

  Exactly!  Which was my implied point.  Well done Roeland.

  This outlines the difference between an "ICANN COnstituency"
and a "Stakeholders Constituency".  They are not necessarily,
the same thing.

Roeland Meyer wrote:

> The reason the ICANN BoD needs to approve is in the bylaws. The NC gets to
> nominate a BoD seat and the BoD gets to determine who gets to sit on the NC.
> The NC is purely constituted of ONLY recognized constituencies. I guess they
> mean that the rest of us can bugger ourselves. Please note the closed-loop
> nature of the authority structure. The BoD gets to control the composition
> of the NC. The DNSO/NC does not have enough seats to counter this. IIRC, the
> other SOs do not have this feed-back loop.
>
> This whole constituency thing is a FUBAR'd SNAFU.
>
> |> -----Original Message-----
> |> From: Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com]
> |> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 12:51 AM
> |> To: Patrick Corliss
> |> Cc: Gomes, Chuck; [ga]
> |> Subject: Re: [ga] The "Precondition" Argument for an Individuals
> |> Constituency
> |>
> |>
> |> Patrick, Chuck and all assembly members,
> |>
> |>   I fail to see why any constituency need to be approved by the ICANN
> |> BoD at all.  Why?  A constituency is a constituency, whether or
> |> not the ICANN BOD approves of it or not.  We have seen already
> |> too many times now that the ICANN BOD uses the formation
> |> of any constituency as a tool for it's own BOD member purposes.
> |> When I wonder are all of you going to really learn that lesson?
> |>
> |> Patrick Corliss wrote:
> |>
> |> > On Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:05:28 -0500, Chuck Gomes wrote:
> |> > >As I have communicated before, in person in GA meetings and on
> |> > > this list, I believe that a new constituency should
> |> organize itself and
> |> > > demonstrate strong representativeness of the community
> |> involved and
> |> > > then submit its proposal for recognition.  Just because
> |> the idea of an
> |> > > individuals constituency makes sense to many of us, that
> |> is not enough
> |> > > to approve it.
> |> >
> |> > > If I was a board member I would want to see evidence of
> |> an organization
> |> > > that is functioning or at least ready to function and
> |> one that can show that
> |> > > it represents a reasonable sample of the population it
> |> claims to represent.
> |> > In
> |> > > my opinion that has never happened.
> |> >
> |> > Hi Chuck
> |> >
> |> > In his reply to your post, David Farrar made some
> |> compelling observations.
> |> > His remarks have led others to comment in a way that may
> |> get away from your
> |> > point.
> |> >
> |> > What you are saying very clearly, and I agree, is that any
> |> new constituency
> |> > should organise itself first to be reasonably acceptable
> |> to the ICANN Board.
> |> >
> |> > Please don't misunderstand, everybody AGREES with you on
> |> that and, except for
> |> > an odd fringe lunatic somewhere, they always have.  So
> |> what's the problem?
> |> >
> |> > (1)    It's a very difficult task in the special case of
> |> individuals.
> |> > However, many people have put serious effort into the
> |> attempt.  Others, like
> |> > myself, have either tried to assist or would be prepared
> |> to assist if the game
> |> > was fair.
> |> >
> |> > (2)    But there's the rub.  The game's not fair.  Asking
> |> people to set up a
> |> > constituency for individuals when ICANN has no intention
> |> of allowing
> |> > participative democracy is a dream.  Those with any sense
> |> see that quite well.
> |> >
> |> > So the fact that you are going along with what I am
> |> calling the "precondition"
> |> > argument indicates that you are either (a) being fooled by
> |> the FUD or (b) lack
> |> > personal integrity.
> |> >
> |> > I have already said that, in my opinion, (b) does not apply.
> |> >
> |> > Eric Dierker made that implication but I think he was just
> |> being careless as
> |> > usual.  Ross Wm. Rader can be discounted to some extent
> |> because he is a rival
> |> > registrar (as pointed out by Patrick Greenwell).
> |> Definitely we should all
> |> > avoid such comments in relation to issues which are
> |> unrelated to the accused
> |> > person's core interest.
> |> >
> |> > In other words, I would accept that you or Ross may be
> |> perceived to have a
> |> > conflict of interest in relation to matter directly
> |> relating to your
> |> > employer's business activities.  I would not accept that you should
> |> > necessarily be so labeled in relation to more general issues like
> |> > "contituencies" or "consensus".
> |> >
> |> > Anyway, back to the point.  Could I please advise you to
> |> drop what I am
> |> > calling the "precondition" argument.  Should you find this
> |> too difficult, you
> |> > should move on to the next step and assist in building a
> |> foundation acceptable
> |> > to ICANN.
> |> >
> |> > Otherwise such precondition arguments are seen as mere
> |> hurdles being placed in
> |> > the way by those who are determined not to implement the
> |> requested structure.
> |> >
> |> > Such a view leads to these nasty "integrity" questions !!
> |> >
> |> > Best regards
> |> > Patrick Corliss
> |> >
> |> > --
> |> > 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 for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes 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:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
> |> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> |>
> |>
> |> --
> |> 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 for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes 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:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
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



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>