Re: [ga] Message from the ILLEGITIMATE Chair

[Dnsipv6@aol.com]

James and everyone else,

  Yes, this is good food for thought.  It's taste is foul, to be sure.

David "Dude" Jenson
INEGRopu-East Director

In a message dated 1/25/00 7:29:54 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
jim.touton@netzero.net writes:

<< Bradley and all DNSO'ers,
 
   The concern you state in your comments are just the sort of thing an
 ILLEGITIMATE Chair would do or suggest be done.  Food for thought?
 
 IDNO Bootstrap wrote:
 
 > Mr. Chairman,
 >
 > The results of the poll are, even by your own acknowledgement in an
 > earlier post, bogus. It was also conducted under an umbrella of abstention
 > by some and a public record of it's lack or ability to accomodate some who
 > expressed their desire to participate but could not.
 >
 > That is besides the point here. I see nothing that prevents the GA Chair
 > from making decisions arbitrarily by executive order in the absence of a
 > set of rules defining our desired democratic process.
 >
 > That sounds indeed dangerous. but to get the ball rolling right now
 > decisive action is required, and you have the implied authority to do so
 > absent other adopted procedures.
 >
 > Make the best of it Roberto. I for one, trust you will do your best, and
 > remember nobody's perfect, and your not doing this to win any popularity
 > contests.
 >
 > Regards,
 >
 > -Bradley D. Thornton-
 >
 > On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
 >
 > > Folks,
 > >
 > > it is time for me to take a decision about the rules for the management
 > > of the mailing list.
 > >
 > > The results of the poll are before us: they are, obviously, not giving a
 > >  clear indication. There is a slight majority of "yes", but not a clear
 > > indication in either sense.
 > >
 > > My reading of the results and of the discussion on this subject is that
 > > the major concern is about the process: the main objections are not
 > > about the need for rules, a fact that is widely acknowledged, but on
 > > some aspects of this specific set of rules, and on the path that has
 > > carried us here.
 > >
 > > On the other hand, it will be unwise to freeze the currently
 > > unacceptable situation of "absence of rules" while we continue our
 > > search for the "perfect set of rules". Deadlines are in front of us, the
 > >  agenda is full of items to be discussed, and we need to move forward.
 > >
 > > I have clearly stated before the election that my target was to have a
 > > working GA, and in particular to give a voice to those who are not part
 > > of any Constituency, and that therefore do not have any other forum for
 > > presenting their views: I would not be acting in line with my proposals
 > > of only one month ago if I let the debate continue further without
 > > taking any immediate action.
 > >
 > > While we debate on this otherwise legitimate question about the process,
 > >  and we try to perfect the proposal currently before us, decisions about
 > >  questions of substance are taken somewhere else.
 > > While we engage in endless discussion and flood with noise the only
 > > forum where individuals can voice their opinions, the other components
 > > of the complex Internet puzzle progress without us.
 > >
 > > Therefore, we must adopt the set of rules that are before us as a first
 > > step. We can rivisit the situation in the future, obviously, but we need
 > >  to start managing the list in a way that will reduce the noise and
 > > recreate better conditions for the debate.
 > >
 > > We will adopt the rules for a three-months period. I am confident that
 > > the situation will change, and that the debate will be more productive,
 > > without any of the much feared "censorships". In fact, the existence of
 > > the ga-unfiltered list will give sufficient guarantees and visibility of
 > >  the "filters".
 > >
 > > In this three-months timeframe we can surely define better rules and/or
 > > propose alternative ones, but we must indeed lay down an action plan on
 > > what we want to achieve, because the next big deadline, the ICANN
 > > meeting in Cairo, is less than six weeks away.
 > > This is the challenge that we have before us.
 > >
 > > If this operation will not work, and either the "filters" put in place
 > > by the SAA will be proven to be "censoring" the participation, or if the
 > >  people that have abandoned the GA are not coming back (which means that
 > >  my analysis of the reasons of their quitting was incorrect), I will
 > > draw the political consequence of the facts, and resign.
 > >
 > > Back to the practical aspects, the first step is to appoint the SAA.
 > >
 > > Please consider this message an official call for volounteers.
 > >
 > > Best regards
 > > Roberto
 > >
 >
 > --Bradley D. Thornton MCSE; MCT.--  , bootstrap  of
 > the Cyberspace Association,
 > the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
 > http://www.idno.org  (or direct:)
 > http://www.tallship.net/idno
 
 James Touton
 Legal and Policy Advisory Council,
 INEGRoup (Stakeholder)
  >>