RE: [ga] Extension of the Interim Board Directors

["JandL" <jandl@jandl.com>]

> Marc,
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Marc
> > Schneiders Sent: 7. november 2000 10:33 To: Alf Hansen Cc: Sandy
> > Harris; ga@dnso.org Subject: RE: [ga] Extension of the Interim Board
> > Directors
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, at 09:22 [=GMT+0100], Alf Hansen wrote:
> >
> > > I think it is a waste of time for the DNSO GA to decide
> > anything about the
> > > composition of the Board. The DNSO should give advice to the Board
> > > about DNSO matters. Of course, we can have an opinion about it,
> > > but I
> > think other
> > > channels than the DNSO have to be used if the goal is to change
> > > the composition of the Board.
> >
> > Perhaps you have other channels. I have not.
> > Perhaps you can use those other channels? For those of us, who are
> > not 'inside', making a statement is about the only thing. And I
> > wouldn't mind getting it out in the open. I am sure ICANN is also
> > much in favour of that, given its bottom-up approach and
> > transparency.
> >
> 
> I have no such channels, either. I just think we should focus on
> things we can do something about and act as a Domain Name Support
> Organisation, not as the Owner of the ICANN company. 

Just who are the "owners" of ICANN?  It is a non-profit organization 
whose membership is supposed to drive it.  Part of the problem with 
ICANN is its refusal to recognize its membership.  According to 
California law, anyone who votes for board members is a member 
with all rights of a member.  Just because the BoD changed the 
bylaws, it doesn't change the law.  The bylaws changes may be 
against the law.

If the GA does not make a statement representing its membership, 
then why bother at all?  Why shouldn't the GA stand up and make 
it's wishes known?  Since one of the greatest hurdles we have to 
face is the make-up of the BoD, and just about everyone in the GA 
agrees that it requires change, where will it come from if not the GA 
and the MAL?  The BoD may have attempted to disenfranchise us, 
and we can let them OR the GA can raise its voice OR we can allow 
ICANN to continue on its present course and totally disenfranchise 
all individuals and small businesses.

Leah Gallegos

We can play that
> we are the owners, but it will be a waste of time. Let us make some
> progress on the issues on item 3 on the Agenda for LA:
> 
>           - Individual Constituency, 10 min
>           - Procedures for GA Chair elections, 10 min
>           - Relationship GA/@Large, 5 min
>           - Multilingual testbed, 5 min
>           - New TLDs,  5 min
>           - DNSO Review, 40 min
> 
> As you see, there are very few minutes per item, so we need to cover
> them on line on beforehand.
> 
> Just my opinion.
> 
> Best regards,
> Alf H
> 
> --
> 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


--
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