Re: [ga] Motion asking for GA poll on rebid of ICANN contract - update 1

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 00:10 3/05/02 -0700, William X Walsh wrote:

>This "motion" is nothing but an attempt by some vocal ICANN critics do
>try and create an "embarrassment" for ICANN so they can say that
>ICANN's own DNSO General Assembly has said "blah blah blah" and use
>that in their media plays.
>
>It is ill-times, counter productive, and those who support it are
>doing everything possible to try and rush it through.
>
>I hope our elected chair will be the leader he has shown himself to be
>and resist such efforts.

Thomas has  avoided a leaders' role and restricted himself to selective 
recording and "controlling".

Even if it is a small minority that wants a Poll, such a Poll should  be 
held. After due process.  I recall Mr Walsh' own holy indignation when 
*his* demand for a Poll was not promptly met, when there was not even an 
(SC) Chair to approve it.

But a re-bid of the ICANN contracts is not a trivial matter.  A lot of 
people have invested a lot of their time trying to put ICANN on the 
rails.  In case of a new NewCo, much of this will have to be done again.

Please consider that alternative bidders such as the ORSC are not exactly 
in any shape to stand a chance to succeed.

I would like to hear informed debate about what likely bidders the DoC 
could expect.

Perhaps some participants here have the time to formula solid debate 
positions in the next ten days. Others may only have a few hours in the 
weekend.
If there is a vote in only 10 days time, I will abstain. It is too short 
and therefore too exclusionary.

I will favour a vote  when at least 3 weeks time is given for focused 
debate and when both sides of the argument get the opportunity to present 
counter arguments.
I want to hear FACTS about the most likely candidates to win such a re-bid 
and about their interests.

There are alternatives for the GA to do a demo. It does not have to be a 
DoC re-bid. The GA could equally "vote" for the Board to terminate the 
contracts of  Louis Touton and Stuart Lynn. Or to change their law firm 
Jones Day.  Or whatever.
As a "demonstration" it has equal value. As for effectiveness, it may even 
be better :)

I am not in favour of the GA doing a demo by committing harakiri.



--Joop

--
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