[ga] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] GA on new Blueprint for changes in GA
Jamie wrote from Bucharest: <<In my opinion, the value of the GA being able to elect its own leaders and to register its own independent views is to provide evidence that the ICANN board is out of step with the Internet community (when this happens), and to prevent the ICANN board from claiming a global consensus, when they don't have one. It's a safety value and a modest system for accountability, which apparently is why is being eliminated.>> Jamie: I agree completely with everything you say below about the GA and its value as part of the DNSO and ICANN. When the DNSO was originally designed, everyone realized that our noncommercial voice was outnumbered 6:1 in the constituencies. The GA was offered to us as a place where other voices, particularly individual and noncommercial domain name holders, could be heard. As I sat for two terms in the Names Council, the terrible imbalance of the Constituencies became even more clear -- on issues and elections of leading trademark attorneys to the ICANN Board. We needed the GA voice for balance. But the GA was lost for a long time, with no one knowing how to organize it. Jamie, you showed the GA how to find its voice and take its rightful place in the DNSO. Your work was incredible and allowed ICANN to hear clearly from users whose voice was kept silence in other parts of the ICANN process. Thank you! But the GA's place on the map has made it a target for destruction. I believe that ICANN's elimination of the GA's tools (strawpolls) and voice is so fundamentally wrong that it is grounds in itself for the rebid of ICANN. kathy kleiman
|