[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ga] We "decided" to defer the election of our ICANN board seats
The GA is the sum of the [members of] the constituencies, the Names Council,
and those who are participating in the work of the DNSO but who are not
members of either of the groups above. For the time being that third
category is being defined as those who have signed up to one of the GA
mailing lists, but the bylaws do not prevent a wider definition.
In short: everyone in the DNSO is also in the GA.
Antony
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Mark C.
> Langston
> Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:42 PM
> To: Alejandro Pisanty, DGSCA y FQ, UNAM
> Cc: Kilnam Chon; Javier; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] We "decided" to defer the election of our ICANN board
> seats
>
>
>
> On 17 September 1999, "Alejandro Pisanty, DGSCA y FQ, UNAM"
> <apisan@servidor.unam.mx> wrote:
> >
> >Does anybody have specific proposals of a few key questions that
> should be
> >addressed by nominees? They should, IMO, cover the interests and more
> >importantly the *principles* of their own constituency, relevance of
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> >technical background and proven record in public organizations (whence we
> >can deduct something about honesty, consistency, availability for the
> >task, etc.), and a view of the future for ICANN's work.
>
>
> Have we so soon forgotten that one of the REASONS for the GA is to allow
> people who AREN'T members of constituencies to have a voice?
>
> Please, people. Let's try to proceed with an eye towards fairness.
> Rush this, and it'll end up botched. There is no need for a rush,
> other than the timetable that the NC has seen fit to impose on us.
>
> We're a seperate body, a seperate entity from the NC, and we do NOT have
> to adhere to their demands. Quite the contrary, they should act at
> OUR behest. They are there to serve as elected representatives of
> those qualified to be members of constituencies, and to act on the
> will of the majority of the DNSO membership. That is the GA.
>
> --
> Mark C. Langston LATEST: ICANN refuses Let your voice be heard:
> mark@bitshift.org to consider application for http://www.idno.org
> Systems Admin Constituency status from organized http://www.icann.org
> San Jose, CA individual domain name owners http://www.dnso.org
>