RE: [ga] Problems/Conclusions

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

There is a certain value in being
> pragmatic, and in recognizing that if one approach fails to come
> to fruition,
> other options yet remain that might further one's interests.

That's called "sitting on the fence".


> My interest is in establishing a structure for the At-Large so that the
> voices of those not represented by the Supporting Organizations
> may be heard.

So why recommend a rebid if you think this is still possible within the Lynn
Plan framework?

>  Such an At-large would include a myriad number of groups (from user
> associations like CECUA, to smaller groups like PFIR, to groups that
> represent the registrant interest).

Atlarge.com is noted by its absence in this list. Why would those who have
signed up to AtLarge.com endorse you as a member of the At Large Committee
if you do not even mention them as part of the plan?


To organize such a structure takes a
> fair amount of work which I don't wish left in the hands of ICANN staff
> alone.  That's why I volunteered.
>

Exactly, but whose support do you have for your position?

Regards,
Joanna

--
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