Re: [ga] Lies, damned lies, and votes.

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

James, Thomas and all assembly members,

  Yeah I kinda thin Thomas was and is being quite abusive in his
choice of Subject lines here.  Hence I would like to register
a complaint in that regard....

  Thomas, I expected, and still do expect better from the chair than
this nonsense.  Please apologize to Jamie and the rest of the
assembly members..

James Love wrote:

> Thomas, how gracious of you too.   I also look forward to your summary of GA
> activities.     Jamie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thomas Roessler" <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
> To: <ga@dnso.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 5:59 AM
> Subject: [ga] Lies, damned lies, and votes.
>
> : Note how the motion which drew fewer "yes" votes is promoted as the
> : "most important" one in James Love's message to random-bits.
> : ICANNwatch editor Ted Byfield even goes a step further: In his
> : ICANNwatch piece at
> : <http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=759>, he does not even
> : mention motion 2.
> :
> : --
> : Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
> :
> :
> :
> :
> : ----- Forwarded message from James Love <james.love@cptech.org> -----
> :
> : From: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>
> : To: "NCDNHC-discuss list" <discuss@icann-ncc.org>
> : Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 05:41:19 -0400
> : Subject: [ncdnhc-discuss] CPTech statement on GA rebid vote
> : List-Id: Discussion List of Non-Commercial Domain Name Holders
> Constituency  <discuss.icann-ncc.org>
> :
> :
> : ----- Original Message -----
> : From: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>
> : To: <random-bits@lists.essential.org>
> : Cc: <reform-comments@icann.org>
> : Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 5:12 AM
> : Subject: CPTech on vote to rebid ICANN contracts
> :
> :    [Note: CPTech statement on vote follows
> :     summary of Motion 1]
> :
> : It isn't that common for an organization to vote to give
> : others a chance to replace it, but that is what the ICANN
> : DNSO "General Assembly" did yesterday.  The vote was
> : controversial within ICANN, generating hundreds of missives
> : to the GA discussion list, and resulting in the highest GA
> : vote tally ever recorded (218 voters), and the highest rate
> : of online voter participation (37.2 percent of registered
> : voters) since the GA was created two years ago.
> : (http://www.dnso.org/secretariat/b12.fullrecord.html)
> :
> : The most important vote was "Motion 1," the so-called
> : "nuclear option," which called upon the US Department of
> : Commerce to rebid its contracts with ICANN.  The vote on
> : this motion was:
> :
> :                148 I FOR Motion 1 ("Request to US DoC")
> :                 54 I vote AGAINST Motion 1
> :                 15 I ABSTAIN regarding Motion 1
> :
> : A similar but somewhat more restrained motion 2 which
> : criticized the ICANN board and its reform process also
> : passed:
> :
> :                164 I vote FOR Motion 2 ("Reform principles")
> :                 33 I vote AGAINST Motion 2
> :                 19 I ABSTAIN regarding Motion 2
> :
> :
> : Here is the guts of Motion 1:
> :
> : "The Internet Corporation for Assigned names and Numbers
> : (ICANN) has dramatically changed the initial terms of
> : reference for ICANN, and . . . these proposed changes have
> : met extensive opposition in the Internet community . . .
> : 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. . . 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 . . .
> : privatization and internationalization of DNS services,
> : consistent with the need for stability, but also innovation,
> : competition and freedom."
> :
> :
> : CPTech statement of the GA vote,
> :
> : "It is clear that the ICANN Board of Directors does not have
> : the support of the Internet community, and now it is
> : official that they do not have the support of their own
> : public forum, and the only consensus that exists is to
> : reject the ICANN board's proposed "reforms" for ICANN, and
> : start over.   The ICANN board is rapidly dismantling every
> : vehicle for democracy within ICANN, and this vote reminds
> : everyone why.  The ICANN board and staff is seeking to
> : impose an unpopular governance system on the Internet, and
> : the only way they can do that is to suppress avenues for
> : recording popular will.  The US Department of Commerce has
> : to confront a painful fact, ICANN is not working, not
> : listening, and not willing to heal itself.  There should be
> : consequences for failures, and even non-profit organizations
> : should face competition.  If ICANN can't tolerate elections
> : for its board members, and isn't willing to limit its own
> : powers in any meaningful way, it's time to think about
> : replacing ICANN with something else.  There can and should
> : be an open competition and a new debate about how the
> : Internet should be managed.  The GA asked for an
> : international privatized approach that addresses the need
> : for Internet stability, but they also insisted on a system
> : that protects innovation, competition and freedom.   These
> : last values are the ones that the current ICANN board has
> : ignored."    James Love, Dirctor, CPTech
> :
> :
> :
> : Full Text of motion 1
> :
> : Motion 1. "Request that US DoC hold open competition
> :            for services now offered by ICANN"
> : ------------------------------------------------------------
> :
> : 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.
> :
> : ------------------------------------------------------------
> : Full text of Motion 2.
> : "Basic principles for the ICANN Reform Process"
> : ------------------------------------------------------------
> :
> : Whereas there are certain basic principles which have to be honored by an
> : entity coordinating key Internet resources in order to gain the trust of
> the
> : Internet community,
> :
> : Whereas these principles include transparent process, broad input into
> : policy-making, which must include meaningful individual  and
> non-commercial
> : participation, and accountability (including  independent review of
> : decisions),
> :
> : Whereas there is a widespread perception that ICANN is moving away from
> : these principles, in particular by stalling or abandoning processes for
> the
> : implementation of an independent review system and for participation of
> the
> : Internet community at large in ICANN oversight,
> :
> : the General Assembly of the DNSO reminds the ICANN Board that it must
> adhere
> : to these principles in any reform proposal and make
> : it sufficiently known how proposed reforms provide improvements regarding
> : these principles.   Should the ICANN reform process fail to provide
> : significant improvements in these regards, it is the international
> Internet
> : community's and governments' task to consider how all of or parts of
> ICANN's
> : responsibilities could be transferred smoothly to one or more new or
> : existing organizations which are accountable to the international Internet
> : community as a whole, have clearly defined missions and are not only under
> : the sole control of a national department of commerce, without endangering
> : the stability of the DNS or the Internet as a whole. In the meantime, all
> : groups of the Internet community are called to deliver their input on
> : reforms needed.
> : ------------------------------------------------------------
> :
> :
> : --------------------------------
> : James Love mailto:james.love@cptech.org
> : http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
> :
> :
> : _______________________________________________
> : Discuss mailing list
> : Discuss@icann-ncc.org
> : http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> :
> :
> : ----- End forwarded message -----
> : --
> : 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

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders 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