[ga] Re: [atlarge-discuss] (fwd) Urgent input needed for ERC on At-Large ***pleas...

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

Michael and all stakeholders or other interested parties,

  For purposes of clarification for Michael here and any others that
have difficulty with the intricacies of the written english language
the following is offered:

  FYI Michael,  "I" is as a single member of INEGroup.  "WE", is
as a membership organization inclusive of myself...


Micheal Sherrill wrote:

> Hello Jeff (Zombi) Williams:
>
> i we [INEGroup]...
>
> Huh?  Gotcha.
>
> Talk about Freudian slips...
>
> Regards,
>
> Micheal Sherrill
> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
> From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> Date:  Fri, 19 Jul 2002 23:33:02 -0700
>
> Danny and all stakeholders or other interested parties,
>
>   i we [INEGroup] predicted in several posts I made to the
> DNSO GA Forum and the NCDNHC forum, the ISOC has been
> and will remain as long as the current ICANN BoD and staff
> can manage it, to be the defacto "At-Large" for ICANN even though
> the ISOC no longer itself allows for individual members to vote on issues
> or even now it's own Directors.  I would there for myself suggest that
> any or all of you ask yourselves is this representative of the stakeholders/users
>
> in any where near an open and transparent fashion?
>
> DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
>
> > Richard writes:
> >
> > << Alternatively, the participating groups should agree to recognise the
> >  scale/numbers of their respective memberships.
> >
> >  They should then negotiate (without intervention from Denise Michel) how
> >  many delegates should be elected to the Committee from each participating
> >  group. >>
> >
> > A weighted delegation approach will not best serve the members of this
> > organization.  Essentially you have one chapter.  ISOC has 60 "official"
> > chapters with another 70 in "chapter-in-formation" status.  They have more
> > than 10,000 members... you have not even 1000.  Unless you plan on the ALAC
> > being dominated by ISOC to the exclusion of almost every other party, this is
> > not a good idea.  There are already 11 ISOC members on the 27-member ALOC
> > panel.
> >
> > PS.  I am a member of ISOC-NY and I support ISOC efforts, but in my view the
> > ALAC doesn't require a weighted approach.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>
> 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
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

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