Re: [ga] GA/DNSO Funding Issues

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Dassa,
for once I am 100% with you. Even if I think easier to show things and 
attract that to force people. What you describe is what I call "going 
Estonian".

Estonia is an incredible story. The government went Internet the way you 
describe. And now the citizens may share in the Government meetings 
decisions in real time!  And it works. They are going to extend the system 
to cities, public services and university administration.

What is interesting is it is becoming there part of their culture. Then you 
do not need to impose it because everyone goes by it. And understand why it 
is better.

Our world changes. And time to time it is for the better.

I would like to propose something: that we use the BPs of Bill and Joana, 
Joop's IDNO management rules, the rules of different MLs we know, may be 
trying to get in touch with Estonian system developers, etc... and instead 
of debating we try to *specify* from experience such a system we could use.

You may remember we discussed technical details at length one year ago with 
WXW? Why not to have another attempt? All the debates in here that Roberto 
and Harald lead would also serve.

I am sure that good specifications and the aura of the ICANN would interest 
software publishers and we could have a free beta system. We could then 
share in the improvement definitions. Many governance groups in the world 
could benefit from such a system too.

Jefsey


On 01:47 26/08/01, Dassa said:
>I'm afraid my participation levels are down at the moment and may get
>worse due to actually having a real life as opposed to how some people
>may see my activities :).  However, I have been giving the subject of
>funding some thought.
>
>Funding for the GA and DNSO or any of the ICANN bodies is not a simple
>matter.  I see a lot of discussion on how it is pay to play and about
>the inequality of the system.  I suggest a complete turn around with
>our thinking.  Instead of discussing ICANN or external sources funding
>attendance at F2F meetings and so forth, we should look at ways to
>minimise financial commitment by participants and limiting some of the
>advantages those with good financial backing may have.
>
>It is commonly understood that those with financial advantages are
>able to participate at the F2F meetings and exert more influence by
>having a large presence at all such meetings.  They are also able to
>engage in more direct communications with the ICANN Board by way of
>having more direct contact.
>
>Perhaps instead of attempting to level the field at their level which
>involves higher expenditure we should be looking for the lowest common
>demonitor and have the playing field at a level that encourages the
>most participation.
>
>I would suggest that the F2F meetings be extrememly limited and that
>more economical means of communication be employed.  I futher suggest
>that there be strict guidelines on how the ICANN Board is approached.
>I would like to see hallway negotiations abolished.  No more of the
>back room meetings.
>
>If all communication was conducted and only accepted at a level
>available to all, the issue of funding and equality is dealt with.
>
>My proposal is that all ICANN communications/meetings be conducted
>online and in the mailing lists.  All hard copy documentation
>including internal correspondance be made public on the website and we
>have a fully open system.  (note: some sensitive correspondance may be
>excluded)
>
>One of the reasons for this suggestion is that even if we evolve both
>internal and external funding, there will always be inequality between
>those who have good finances and those who don't.  We can never hope
>to match the expenditure some large companies may be willing to put
>into the ICANN process.  We can not enforce equality as the system
>currently stands.  We need to place limits so that those with
>financial advantages only have the same access as those with limited
>funds.  The common ground for the majority is access to the Internet.
>Let us make that our base line.  Not the higher level of needing to
>attend F2F meetings and invest large sums into a process we are all
>contributing to as volunteers.
>
>Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.
>
>--
>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

--
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