[ga] Re: [atlarge-discuss] VB on elections for ICANN board members

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

Vittorio and all stakeholders of interested parties,

Vittorio Bertola wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 14:17:15 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >Danny and all stakeholders or interested parties,
> >
> >  I have to agree for the most part with Danny's simple but direct
> >evaluation points below.
> >
> >  It is now obvious that we have pannel-squatters just as the ICANN
> >BOD has Board-squatters.  None of these Pannel members legitimately
> >represents the ICANNATLARGE.COM members to make any definitive
> >decisions regarding the election by an At-Large for it's members.
>
> We are not making decisions at all.

  I didn't say that you were.  I said, "None of these Panel members legitimately

represents the ICANNATLARGE.COM members to make any definitive
decisions regarding the election by an At-Large for it's members."
(See above, my original comments)

> If we were, everything would be
> completely different. However, we are trying to let ICANN Board members know
> that we exist, and we won't give up, and we really want them to modify the
> Blueprint to take the users' needs into higher consideration.

  This is fine, but it is not quite good enough Vittorio.  You don't
just "Let the ICANN BoD members know", you must be much
more forceful that that if you expect to be taken seriously...

> It will be
> them who decide how and how much the Blueprint will be changed before
> approval, not us. We, at this time, don't have any power.

  Yes you do have power.  This seem to be the problem with At-Large
efforts.  They continue to believe in a defeatist attitude, which just
plays into the hands of the ICANN BOD and staff.  When I wonder
will you folks ever learn???

>
>
> >Perhaps as Jamie indicated in his resignation letter, why he rightly
> >resigned.  I would strongly suggest that this "Pannel" consider
> >adjusting their lack of specific effort towards using what is
> >already proven and in use currently towards elections for
> >At-Large representatives rather than pontificating in the opposite
> >direction...
>
> If we can't get any place for the users in the new ICANN structure, what
> would such representatives work for?

  They would work for the ICANNATLARGE.COM as and independent
effort at first if necessary.  How do you think orgs like the ISOC, IAB,
IETF, IEEE, ITU, and so forth got started Vittirio?  The only difference
with any Atlarge (Such as ICANNATLARGE.COM)  effort doesn't have
it the luxury of the time those orgs had...  So get busy, bet of you
collective posteriors, and get busy.  You already have plenty of
ideas to draw from, and more in the pipeline, you have plenty
of "Pledges" by which to get a start in funding, you have the ability
to gather more members to strengthen the ICANNATLARGE.COM
position, and you know the E-Mail addresses of those government
and other officials that are willing to help.  The only thing that is
lacking is doing the Leg Work...


> --
> .oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo vb.
> Vittorio Bertola     <vb@vitaminic.net>    Ph. +39 011 23381220
> Vitaminic [The Music Evolution] - Vice President for Technology
>
> -snip uneeded disclaimer nonsense...

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