Re: [ga] Re: Motion for a vote of no confidence in the Board

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Danny and all assembly members,

  Thank you Danny for basically stating our [INEGroup's]
basic positions almost word for word.  However your conclusion
is only part of what Mike Roberts calls a solution.  Any independent
review board, which the ICANN BOD and staff claims it has now,
should or must be made up of stakeholders/users IOHO... They
must be randomly selected via a non-human random selection
process, have a limited term to serve, be paid according to their
level of responsibility, and have unchecked access to any and
all records of BoD and staff members files pertaining to ICANN related
business including personal E-Mail, on demand...  Anything less
would be a terrible joke...

DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> Mike Roberts writes:  "The direct election option is gone."
>
> It doesn't matter that after a year-long study the ALSC still supported
> direct elections, that NAIS supported direct elections, that Public Forum
> participants supported direct elections, that the GA, NCDNHC,BC, gTLDs
> supported direct elections... the only thing that matters to Mike is that we
> resign ourselves to acceptance of the verdict of the Board to eliminate
> direct elections.
>
> Why should we?
>
> If this Board is incapable of recognizing broad consensus, then why we should
> we bother to participate in any schemes to retain these incumbents?  Did the
> Board recognize the consensus on the VeriSign renegotiations?  Did the Board
> respect the consensus on dot org?  Of course not, and rather than abiding by
> the rules "as they are required to do" and remanding policy recommendations
> back to the originating SO's for further work if so required, they instead
> arbitrarily and capriciously crafted their own resolutions at odds with the
> community will.  This has become an ugly pattern.
>
> There are no checks on the power of this Board-run-amok.  Until such checks
> are in place, why should we choose to cooperate?  Any consensus that we reach
> is guaranteed to be overturned by the Board with no right of appeal other
> than to the same smug insiders that sit on the reconsideration committee.
>
> If you expect us to "get to work", give us first an Independent Review Board.
>
> --
> 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