[ga] Negative outreach norms, board claims regarding consensus in favor of "reform" efforts

["James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>]

1.  What is the argument for not having people vote in a GA ballot measure,
if they care about an ICANN issue?  I posted some notices that there will be
a vote in the GA, and gave out pointers where to register.   There have not
been that many new voter registrations, and certainly a lot of the ones that
are new are people with a long history of following ICANN, who just were not
registered.   I wasn't registered until a few days ago, despite having spent
more time (and travel money) on ICANN matters over the years that one could
rationally justify.    It would be one thing if someone was going around a
neighborhood or shopping center and signing up people at random who did not
know anything.   Every place where I posted information about the ICANN GA
vote has already had a slug of ICANN posts over the past year or so.   I was
surprised for example to see Alexander signal out the NCDNHC post (they are
a DNSO constituency) or ICANNWatch?  Are these your ideas of uninformed
persons?   I wish Dave Farber had run something on this, or NetTime too.
Many of the best ideas about ICANN are not coming from GA members, but from
others, who if they knew there was an opportunity to vote, would.   I'm not
signing up by brother in law or kids friends for this. Out of an office
staff of 25, we have only two registered (both of us have been attending
ICANN board meetings for years) and I am insulted by some of the inferences
that have been made.   Is there *any* evidence that any of the new
registrations are not more informed about ICANN that the ancient ones (many
of whom probably don't even following things anymore)?    It has of course
been discussed on several non-GA lists, including for example closed lists
like icann-alsg, set up by TR (which I think is a good thing).   I would
like to see *more* not less outreach on this vote, but after these
complaints, who will do it?

2.  One reason to have this vote is that the ICANN board and staff are
telling governments (everywhere) that they have a consensus in the "Internet
 community" on the reform process.  And if they say so, who is to say
otherwise?  Unless, for example, you have something like a vote.    Right
now a GA vote will be a data point.  I think a useful data point regarding
the degree of consensus on the Lynn/Board "reform" efforts, and it would be
more interesting if there was larger participation, going even beyond the
hyperactive GA-list posting community.

  Jamie

--------------------------------
James Love mailto:james.love@cptech.org
http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040


--
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