Re: [ga] Re: GA agenda??

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

Marilyn and all assembly members,

Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:

> Folks, I'm a little confused about what the complaints are about.
>
> Danny will make a report to the NC for the GA. I think that is both becoming
> historically routine (which is good) and actually, I suspect that 15 minutes
> is about what is needed for a report.

  I believe that complaint's as have been discussed on this forum are that
one person cannot accurately provide or present an accurate report to
the NC.  I join im that concern given the Rewrite of the WG-Review
that was done recently...

>
>
> I support that the GA, as we have known it from the first one I attended in
> Berlin (missed Singapore), has and will continue to provide ample
> opportunity to present comments, dialogue, etc. which can be turned into
> resolutions.  I agree that it is hard to come to a resolution "on the spot",
> since most of the work and participation has been developing online.  And
> many may feel left out if new resolutions are taken up without online
> dialogue.

  Yes, all resolutions should be developed online, certainly.  The problem
is precious few ahd been developed thus far.  And only one to my knowledge
has been voted upon of the several that have been put forward...

>
>
> However, if you are instead complaining about not having "open mike" time, I
> am not sure that the NC meeting is the appropriate forum to introduce floor
> debate.

  No the concern (Not necessarily a complaint BTW) that has been discussed
on this forum, is one of only one person (The Chair) doing a presentation
of the GA.

>
>
> Further, I remind all of the Board's Public Forum.  As I recall, that has
> also historically, provided additional comment opportunity from individuals
> or groups.

  Some representatives of groups and as individuals have been restricted
form providing additional comment as is well known.  This remains to be
true on this forum...  Hence, an accurate reflection of the GA is really
needed and should be provided in the report to the NC by more than
just the chair.

>
>
> Regards, Marilyn Cade
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 10:49 AM
> To: Danny Younger
> Cc: General Assembly of the DNSO
> Subject: [ga] Re: GA agenda??
>
> Danny,
>
> Danny Younger wrote:
>
> > Jeff,
> >
> > The timeslot was scheduled by the NC Chair.  As Chair of the NC, he has
> the
> > right to set up his own timetable for the NC meeting.  I am making a
> > presentation at this meeting by request of the NC Chair.  You may
> certainly
> > ask the NC to set aside time for public comments in their session,
> although
> > historically they have made no such provisions.  In our own session there
> > will be ample time to make our collective views known.
>
>   Very well.  However it has been made very apparent to me that making
> views known is often not enough.  We need resolutions to be generated
> out of those sessions and approved by the DNSO GA list for participants
> that may not attend in Stolkholm via GA member vote.  These resolutions
> should than be sent to the NC and the ICANN BoD as the consensus
> of the DSNO GA participants and thereby implemented as ICANN
> policy.  I have serious doubts that this will or can occur, however.
> As such the DNSO GA is without any real power within the DNSO
> or even the larger ICANN itself.  The same can be said for the
> still nonexistent @large.
>
>   Given these facts, Danny, it seems fairly obvious to me and from
> our members other inquiries, the stakeholders, participating or
> not, to directly indicate and reflect that the ICANN BoD along
> with the DNSO NC has not met it's basic mandate or is in
> compliance with it's contracts with DOC (White Paper and MoU).
> Given this to be the true situation, any policies currently assumed
> by the ICANN BoD are in abeyance with their contractual
> obligations and are therefore null and void until such time
> the ICANN BoD and the NC become in compliance with their
> contractual requirements.
>
>   I hope that now I have made myself perfectly clear to you
> regarding the agenda considerations and how they are increasingly
> being viewed, as has been plainly evident for some time now,
> with the vast majority of stakeholders regardless or their level
> of participation, as that participation has been blocked, or otherwise
> not made available to them.  This would of course include the
> DNSO GA through it's questionable practices on the DNSO GA
> ML and the administration there of...
>
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 9:57 AM
> > To: Danny Younger
> > Subject: GA agenda??
> >
> > Danny,
> >
> >  From http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010602.NCstockholm-agenda.html
> > Item 2 is as follows:
> > 2.Presentation by GA chair of GA work agenda Danny Younger (15 mins)
> > I don't see this a very reasonable amount of time for the GA's agenda,
> > and
> > I also don't see that only the Chair's opinion is adequate to make this
> > presentation based upon the discourse on the various DNSO GA
> > Mailing lists of late...
> >
> > --
> > 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
>
> 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

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