Re: [ga] GA Chair

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

Joanne and all remaining assembly members,

Joanna Lane wrote:

>  Jeff Williams wrote:-
> I would tend to lessen the the emphasis on how much $$ anyone is willing to
> provide with respect to GA Chair nominations.  However time and expertise
> and time should play a most important role, IMHO.
>
> -You have not responded to the point I made, but you have responded to a
> point I did not make as if I made it, which I did not, so I will now address
> your point..:-)

  Well I beg to differ with you on this small point.  In your previous post
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc06/msg00567.html , You stated,
"[Joanna]- I would wait until we are close to achieving online parity before
      passing judgment on the benefits of physical attendance. The value that
      both the NC and ICANN places on the GA can be measured by their
willingness
      to support it's existence, including financially. What support is
necessary
      needs to be quantified, but the bottom line can be determined by how much
      people have been willing to give to the cause on an ongoing basis, in
terms
      of their time, expertise and money."

I responded to you reference as it relates to the subject line of this thread
as you indicated.  You last sentence, "What support is necessary
      needs to be quantified, but the bottom line can be determined by how much
      people have been willing to give to the cause on an ongoing basis, in
terms
      of their time, expertise and money." , indicates clearly that MONEY "$$",
is a considering factor.  I respectively disagree.  >;)

>
>
> Granted, whether or not a candidate has a slush fund is important. That is
> why funding of the GA Chair should not treated as funding of the individual
> according to any particular need, but should be treated as funding of the GA
> as a whole, whose members have the discretion to extend support to the Chair
> as they see fit.

 Agreed.

> If the GA decides to give 100% of its funding to it's Chair
> for travel expenses, so be it, but all funding must be filtered through, and
> agreed by, the membership, whatever its source.

  Also agreed.

> IMO, that is the only way to
> protect the authority, independence and integrity of the Chair, and in turn,
> the GA, NC, DNSO, all the way to the top.

  Yes.

>
> >
> >
> > If you read the ICANN Bylaws closely, you will see that the DNSO
> already has a very high profile within the ICANN structure.
>
> - I find it very difficult to believe that a group that can't elect it's own
> Chair enjoys a high profile. In the meaning of *high profile*, I include
> self-esteem and confidence, without which, ability to function is
> effectively crippled.

  Of course you are correct here.  And this has been a systemic problem
with ICANN and the DNSO as well.  It remains so.

>
>
> Jeff Williams wrote:-
>   Seeking feedback from the "Highest Levels" is a bit obtuse to me as to
> what you mean, Joanna.  Can you enumerate further?
>
> - If the GA were to take on the role of *obtaining* feedback directly from
> relevant sources outside of  the ICANN structure, this would add value to
> DNSO in a way that Constituencies could not emulate, since they each have a
> partisan agenda, which the GA does not. That is one of its benefits and all
> the more important for the GA to undertake this role if, as you say, the BoD
> does not care to share insights.

  Also agreed and an area that the current DNSO administration has
for some odd reason, decidedly ignored or dismissed.

>
>
> Disseminating feedback to other interested persons is a separate issue, but
> it's not an insurmountable problem when we have the internet at our
> disposal....:-)

  Exactly right.  But as you know, most of the current and all of the previous
ICANN BoD members were not well versed in the use of the Internet....

>
>
> Regards,
> Joanna

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members 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:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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