Re: [ga] RE: BC Position Paper

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

Marilyn and all assembly members,

Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:

> Danny, and dear fellow GA members,
>
> I stand by the statement that we need to open to new ideas, Danny. The document is a draft, out for comment to the BC constituency for their feedback and comments and discussion within the BC.

  Well this is very good to hear Marilyn!  I hope that you are sincere.  So
to test the sincerity of you comments, perhaps you can get the BC
constituencies ML list archived and allow any and all small, medium,
or large business with a presence on the internet join the BC
openly.  This should take about three days to accomplish...

>
>
> In fact, I have been saying that same thing--at this time of the evolution of ICANN, I think the BC needs to be open to ideas. You pointed out that I said it poorly, and you are correct in that. The Forum idea presented by Stuart would also result in a change in more than chair!  My own personal perspective is that an evolutionary approach would be more optimal; but as I said in my statement at the mike in Accra, we don't yet fully understand what the forums would look like.
>
> Hence, ... be open to new ideas.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DannyYounger@cs.com [mailto:DannyYounger@cs.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 2:00 PM
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Cc: Cade,Marilyn S - LGA
> Subject: BC Position Paper
>
> Dear Marilyn,
>
> In your draft, "Toward a Business Constituency Position on ICANN
> Restructuring and Evolution", you advise BC members to "Examine the proposed
> "forum" structure to determine any improved benefits to the functioning of
> policy development over the existing constituency model of the DNSO".
>
> Your stated reason for such an examination, in editorial comments made to
> Philip (that are still in the source code of the document) was:  LET'S BE
> OPEN TO NEW IDEAS; IT MIGHT BE TO OUR BENEFIT TO CONSIDER THIS, GIVEN WHAT WE
> MAY FACE OTHERWISE WHEN YOU ARE NO LONGER CHAIR.
>
> Essentially what you are stating is... as long as we will no longer control
> the NC, we might as well consider other options.  This strikes me as a rather
> self-serving approach to ICANN restructuring concerns.
>
> --
> 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