Re: [ga] Extension of the Interim Board Directors

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>]

On 2000-11-05 15:12:05 +0100, Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> IMHO this petty, poor and boring comedy should be simply
> addressed in having a petition signed during the MDR meeting to
> sue the ICANN, demanding the respect of the CA law regarding the
> Members. ie that every person sharing into the process of
> electing a Board Director is a Member. A non profit organization
> without Member and a permanent "interim" board, changing the very
> nature of the Board at unexpected will, is pure joke. 

> As Esther Dyson says, it has no legitimacy.

Don't mix up legitimacy (which is certainly problematic) and
legality (which is just an open question).

Some even say that the "At Large Members trick" in the bylaws -
basically, don't put elections into the bylaws, but do a board
decision instead - may be a nice and effective way to work around
the California law's provisions.  One comment I heared was: "if that
law really looks like this, it's just inviting work-arounds".

> We need members (@large plus representative entities) as an ICANN
> GA, the by laws changes to be approved by the ICANN GA, as
> anywhere else in the world. Such an action could be carried
> through a Political Action Comity or equivalent (I propose ICAPAC
> for a name easy to recall and make press), with a Membership fee
> of $100 to pay for the costs. I am ready to subscribe.

I do agree with you that the current process for bylaw changes is
inappropriate, and should be changed in a way which makes it much
harder for the board to change the rules of the game.

-- 
Thomas Roessler                         <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
--
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