Re: [ga] right of GA to elect chair and

["L. Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

It is difficult to understand how Jonathan Cohen could make such a 
statement when it is obvious to the GA members that it is exactly a 
ploy to rid ICANN of its pesky complainants - the idividuals.  Whether 
the purpose of the "Blueprint" is to silence the voice as punishment or 
not is really immaterial.  It is definitely anti-free speech and designed to 
exclude all but the dominant powers that currently exist.

In addition, the comments coming from Congress indicate a demand for 
more inclusion, not less; more transparency, not less.  So far, ICANN is 
having more behind-closed-door meetings, not fewer, as evidenced by 
the one in Bucharest.  

One might suppose that the lack of attendance at the DNSO meeting in 
Bucharest was due to lack of interest.  I believe it is due to lack of 
ability to travel all over the world for most individuals, the late hour for so 
many in the US and the feeling of futility resulting from the Blueprint 
document.  The fact that it was published at such a late date is also 
typical, allowing for no reasonable amount of time to discuss it.  
However, it is so blatant that the comments already made seem to be 
overwhelmingly against its recommendations.

In light of the fact that the BoD will most likely approve it, according to 
reports from Bucharest, why would there be a large number of people 
attempting to refute it?  People are becoming very tired of being paid lip 
service and having no voice in decision making.

Leah

On 26 Jun 2002, at 13:42, James Love wrote:

> I just talked with Jonathan Cohen about the role of the GA in the Blueprint 
> document.  I asked him to support a change that would allow the GA to elect 
> its own chair, and to vote on motions.  I said that the reform proposals 
> including the Blueprint document would be wbidely read as anti-free speech, 
> and also quite petty, since the GA has no real power, elects no one to the 
> names council or the board, and only has the ability to provide a voice to 
> people who have no real power.   He said, have people on the GA tell the 
> board if this is important to them.   He said it was not the case that the 
> ICANN board was trying to punish the GA for voting for a resolution that was 
> critical of the ICANN board.  His email address is :
> 
> Jonathan Cohen <jcohen@shapirocohen.com>
> 
>    Jamie
> 
> ------
> James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
> http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love@cptech.org
> voice: 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
> 
> 


--
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