Re: [ga] on politics and trust

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

Danny, Jonathan and all assembly members,

  It is now, and has been clear from '98 that the trust level for the ICANN
BoD and especially it's various process maneuverings have been less than
stellar.  Recently, with the WLS BoD decision, the .ORG concerns, and
also the .kids.us or rejection of any new gTLD's by edict of Stuart Lynn,
that ICANN's trust level has even further diminished.  Of course, unless
or until any and all stakeholders/users, whether they are organized
in constituency's, Atlarge's, or SO's, have a voice AND a Vote, the
ICANN experiment will continue to be legitimately, ethically and trust
challenged at a minimum.

  The BluePrint for reform, dubbed the "Black-And-Blueprint" by many
coined by our [INEGroup] members, is more of a restructuring of
ICANN in such a way as to disenfranchise as many stakeholders/users
as possible, rather than being inclusive, transparent, and open.  Such
a reform process, is detrimental in so many ways as to be prohibitive
in it's continuance, and destabilizing in design and implementation...

DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> Jonathan,
>
> In your letter to Peter Dengate Thrush (posted to the Council list) you make
> the reasonable suggestion that <<maybe the "politics" could be ramped down by
> all>>.
>
> I draw your attention to the Bucharest ccTLD Response to the Committee on
> Evolution and Reform's Blueprint for ICANN Reform in which the following
> request was made:  "In the spirit of "bottom up" development, the ccTLDs
> prefer to continue using the established name for this SO, ("ccSO") which is
> used in all of our documentation, website domain name, committee names and
> lists, and which reflects the cultural and historical language of the
> internet."
>
> In spite of this eminently reasonable request, the ERC continues to offer
> barbs by pointlessly changing the name of the Supporting Organization for the
> ccTLD community, the latest version being "ccNSO" referenced in the ERC's
> Second Implementation Report.
>
> Ramping down the politics is a two-way street.  Perhaps you could also pen a
> similar letter to your fellow Board members who lately seem to be the ones
> engendering this unfortunate climate.  You might also ask them to provide
> some actual answers to Peter's questions.
>
> You have asked Peter to work proactively to rebuild trust, yet by the day it
> becomes harder and more foolish to trust the Board.  Frankly, I have to ask,
> why should we?  We have had no indication that the Board is committed to
> honoring the consensus view of the Community (as was demonstrated by the
> Board decision on WLS).  If we can no longer count upon you to act in our
> best interest (and this is not the first time that you have unilaterally
> rejected DNSO recommendations), then please explain to us why you should
> warrant our trust.
>
> We too are listening.
>
> --
> 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 127k 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: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
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