<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] Motion # 1
Dear friend,
You are right here.
Your analysis of petition is particularly appropriate.
But I do not feel that when making a statement of condemnation and request
for alternatives one has to have on the plate all of those alternatives.
That seems like placing the cart before the horse.
A rebid and/or petition takes much time and we will have time to do as you
rightly suggest. But first allow us to damn the current situation.
Now does this motion do that in fine wording yet? Very close (thank you to
Joanna that transAtlantic transplant that transcends notions of nationalism)
I personally would like the motion more flat. "Dear DoC we hate how ICANN
is being run and ask you to search for new players."
e
> Karl - you are right about the conflict of interest for you here, but
> my response to Joanna is that it also may not be fair or appropriate
> for anyone at this time to take only one version of the proposed text
> and claim it is ***the*** motion and start a straw-poll on it to get
> its veracity when people are not set on the language of the motion yet.
>
> This is one of the problems with this and a number of the other lists
> that I have spent time with, that it is essentially many fragmented
> voices and this makes the value of such a 'niceified' request to be
> almost worthless at best from what is essentially a disharmonized
> chorus, IMHO.
>
> What needs to happen is that this WG needs to come to specific terms
> with what it is trying to do... and state somewhere
>
> 1) The intent of the motion needs to be defined in very specific
> terms (up at 200,000 feet); and
>
> 2) The process of how the Motion will be propagated and to whom
> needs
> to be worked out, because what you say in the motion is specific to
> whom we send it to. (this is also at 200,000); and
>
> 3) Itemize in the Motion the specific complaints that need to be
> addressed and why (this is the 100,000 foot view); and
> 4) And then submit a formal motion, petitioning for these
> changes.
> (and finally this is the ground zero of the process)
>
> No one sends anyone a letter "asking" for changes, they send petitions
> that mandate something demonstrable. But they also have organizational
> backing on the matter and what is here now is several different groups
> still lobbying for language in the matter.
>
> Todd Glassey
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Karl Auerbach" <karl@CaveBear.com>
> To: "Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>
> Cc: "GA List" <ga@dnso.org>; "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 12:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [ga] Motion # 1
>
>
>> On Thu, 9 May 2002, Joanna Lane wrote:
>>
>> I'm a bit confused - are these 10 names to simply get this motion onto
>> the table so that it may be discussed and ultimately (perhaps) voted
>> upon? Or is this a vote on the motion itself?
>>
>> I'm all for the former (i.e. putting it onto the table for discussion)
>> and if that's what we're doing then count me as a "yes".
>>
>> But if we're talking about the merits of the motion itself - I'm not
>> ready to say yes or no. (In fact, because of my role within ICANN,
>> I'll probably abstain.)
>>
>> --karl--
>>
>>
>> > WHEREAS the Internet Corporation for Assigned names and Numbers
>> > (ICANN)
> has
>> > dramatically changed the initial terms of reference for ICANN, and
>> > is proposing even further changes.
>> >
>> > WHEREAS these proposed changes have met extensive opposition in the
> Internet
>> > community and go even further from the original terms of reference.
>> >
>> > WHEREAS a new open competition would allow the U.S. Department of
> Commerce
>> > (the DoC) to consider both the ICANN Board proposal for
>> > restructuring,
> and
>> > alternatives offered by others for managing key Internet resources,
> while
>> > providing for a public record of the process for enhanced
>> > visibility.
>> >
>> > WHEREAS the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain name Supporting
> Organization
>> > (the DNSO) also reminds the DoC, that in the Green and the White
>> > Paper,
> the
>> > Government of the United States made it clear that it intends to
> withdraw
>> > from management of the Domain name System (the DNS).
>> >
>> >
>> > It is hereby RESOLVED that:-
>> >
>> > The General Assembly of the Domain name Supporting Organization of
> Internet
>> > Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) asks the US
> Department of
>> > Commerce to have an open competition for the services now provided
>> > by
> ICANN,
>> > provided that the new competition would address the need to develop
>> > an international framework for DNS management. An open competition
>> > should
> aim
>> > to achieve comprehensive privatization and internationalization of
>> > DNS services, consistent with the need for stability, but also
>> > innovation, competition and freedom.
>> >
>> > Agree [ ]
>> > Disagree [ ]
>> > Abstain [ ]
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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
>> >
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
http://www.Hi-Tek.com
Reality in a Digital World
The information transmitted in this e-mail is intended for the person or
entity to which it is addressed, and may contain confidential and/or
privileged material. Any review, retransmission or other use of, or
taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If
you receive this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete
this material from any system. Thank you!
--
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|