Re: [ga] You Are Abusing Our Intelligence

[Dan Steinberg <synthesis@videotron.ca>]

ummmmmm Mike,

I think it was Eric that posted it.  as for the content of your post, I find it hard
to disagree with. We seem to have strayed far from karl Auerbach's original posting.

Mike Roberts wrote:

> Jefsey -
>
> Stop this nonsense.
>
> There is a published budget for ICANN that includes the budget for
> the At Large study.  The CEO reports to the Board regularly on budget
> accomplishment and that report is rendered and archived publicly. Not
> only is there no malfeasance, but the fiscal conservatism of the
> committee allowed the Board to extend its term to March 2002 without
> having to find additional funds.
>
> There is a Finance Committee of the Board that reviews budget and
> financial data provided by management and makes reports to the full
> Board that are also presented and archived publicly.
>
> There is an Audit Committee of the Board that reviews all accounting
> and financial management policies of the corporation and makes
> reports to the full Board that are presented and archived publicly.
>
> There is an external audit firm that annually reviews the
> corporation's financial results and renders an opinion on them based
> on generally accepted accounting principles for non-profit
> organizations.  The opinion and accompanying financial statements are
> posted on ICANN's website.  The lead partner of the audit firm has an
> annual closed door session with the non-management Directors of the
> Audit Committee during which any deficiencies in the corporation's
> financial systems and financial management are discussed and
> corrective action required, if any, is adopted.
>
> The corporation renders annual financial reports to the State of
> California and to the Internal Revenue Service, both of which have
> oversight and investigative powers in the event of any discrepancies.
> None of ICANN's reports to these agencies has triggered an oversight
> action.
>
> You and others are conducting a witch hunt for which there is no
> witch.  It's past time to move on to topics that actually have some
> promise of assisting the DNS community in its work.
>
> - Mike
>
> At 9:36 -0800 12/8/01, Eric Dierker wrote:
> >This message was posted to the GA. I felt it appropriate to repost it here.
> >clearly
> >this problem is going to explode.  In all my young years I have never seen a
> >situation where a refusal to disclose and provide that which one should, did
> >not result in the revelation of serious malfeasance.
> >
> >Here we have the refusal of the ALSC to submit detailed reports of their
> >spending and billing to ICANN.  Why?  How could that be harmful to anyone?
> >
> >Eric
> >
> >Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> >
> >>  Mr. Cerf, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Younger,
> >>  The quoted letter of Mr. Younger to Mr. Lynn reflects only partly the
> >>  concerns that ICANN Users may have. Our common interest is obviously that
> >>  the ICANN fulfills its missions to the best common interest. Mission creep
> >>  and mission sleep - as per Mr. Diecker's adequate wording - are both the
> >>  primary matters of concern as in every human organization. Also a mani
> >>  pulite spirit is of the essence as in every organization indirectly
> >>  affecting external large budgets and revenues and providing personal or
> >>  professional fames. Concerns about Internet Participants and people is a
> >>  duty as for any international body which mainly translates into
> >>  transparency, equality to all, democratic consensus based spirit and
> >>  obligation not to enlarge the financial, lingual and digital divides. Last
> >>  but not least professionalism is a necessity to make sure that the
> >>  management is consistent, the action is not contested and the image is
> >>  protected and developed.
> >>
> >>  Mr. Younger asks for a review of the Corporation's actions by Mr. Lynn. I
> >>  am afraid Mr. Lynn has already provided publicly such a review in terms I
> >>  personally found shocking and as such a proof of the Mr. Auerbach's
> >>  reclamations at least regarding the Staff's attitude. I questioned that
> >>  evaluation of mine publicly on the GA as I could be wrong: it was confirmed.
> >>
> >>  At this stage I suppose no one wants a clash nor to display too many things
> >>  in public. So it is time to call on Mr. Vint Cerf. I am a naval officer and
> >>  a public right trainee. In my culture the commander bears the full
> >  > responsibility even if he is for nothing in the problem. This has obviously
> >>  ultimate disadvantages, but from experience it has also immense advantages
> >>  as it gives a full yet controlled authority to treat quickly and nicely any
> >>  problem internally, at its root.
> >>
> >>  I must say that I take also that call to Mr. Vint Cerf as a test to know
> >>  who is the real ICANN CO. To my French law and international naval law
> >  > readings Mr. Stuart Lynn is the President or the EXO. I must also say that
> >  > in both legal cultures of mine denying or imposing constraints to a Member
> >>  of the Board in accessing information he is entitled to is a delict one and
> >>  a military fault in the other that neither a Chair nor a CO has the legal
> >>  ability to cover. Is that different under the US or the local
> >>Californian law?
> >>
> >>  This matter is highly preoccupaying. I make no mistery that I disagree with
> >>  the present policy of the ICANN, structure, strategies and ways of
> >>  management, understanding of the Networks structure. But I never hidden
> >>  either that, if may be I do not understand it in the same way, I fully
> >>  support Mike Roberts word "we the ICANN", though  improvements towards
> >>  agreements. This is by nature what a consensu is about.
> >>
> >>  That a Board Member preoccupated openly by concerns about "democracy" and
> >>  transparency is purposedly made to "sleep" when he wants to investigate on
> >>  the "creep" and on the "mani pulite" aspects is too much "unprofessional".
> >>  This affects the five main priorities I - and probably most of the other
> >>  ICANN Users - assign to the ICANN. This is another reason to call for a
> >>  professional review and an apeasement by the top before it comes to the
> >>  bottom through the media, the courts or the international arena.
> >>
> >>  I suppose that this letter reflects in its own way the thinking of a number
> >>  of ICANN Users on this GA and in other fora. It looks and does hope for a
> >>  peaceful settlement. But I am afraid this is the last internal escalation
> >>  we have on the real root of the ICANN.
> >>
> >>  Best regards.
> >>
> >>  Jefsey Morfin
> >>
> >>  PS. I thank those who have already responded to my proposition to study the
> >>  incorporation of an ICANN User Association. To be on that project study
> >>  group and bootstrap send me only a mail. I underline that this project - as
> >>  it start developing - is in accordance with the spirit of this letter irt
> >>  the ICANN: five identified priorities, an international and real network
> >>  oriented point of view, an active support and cooperation to the mission,
> >>  suggestions to reduce the sleep and a firm opposition to the creep.
> >>
> >>  At 09:16 08/12/01, DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
> >>  >Mr. Lynn,
> >>  >
> >>  >My North American At-Large Director, Karl Auerbach, has once more posted a
> >>  >series of comments regarding the "absolute right" of a Director to inspect
> >>  >and copy corporate documents, a right that he claims you are
> >>denying to him.
> >>  >When I hear an argument by my representative that insists that this
> >>  >Corporation under your stewardship is engaged in applying its
> >>procedures and
> >>  >practices inequitably so as to single him out as a particular party for
> >>  >disparate treatment, such actions not being justified by either substantial
> >>  >or reasonable cause, I have a legitimate right to be concerned
> >>that ICANN is
> >>  >in violation of its Bylaws.
> >>  >
> >>  >As Mr. Auerbach's complaints on this subject matter have been set
> >>forth in a
> >>  >number of fora over the course of several months, and as ICANN's failure to
> >>  >resolve this concern continues to cast doubt upon the integrity of our
> >>  >Corporation, this impasse now begins to affect all of us.  Accordingly, in
> >>  >the interest of resolving this matter, allow me to request that a review of
> >>  >the Corporation's actions with respect to Mr. Auerbach's right of
> >>inspection
> >>  >be undertaken by the full Board.
> >>  >
> >>  >Please advise if you will honor such request for review.
> >>  >
> >>  >regards,
> >>  >Danny Younger
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >--
> >>  >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
>
> --
>
> --
> --
> 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

--
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin  phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec  fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca


--
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