Re: The ccTLD position (was Re: [ga] taking positions on country specific legislation

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

Peter and all assembly members,

Peter Dengate-Thrush wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Eric Dierker" <eric@hi-tek.com>
>
> snip
>
> >We must stand together
> > that there are no deletions to seats to the at large based upon creation
> of any
> > individuals constituency or any new ccTLD constituencies/SOs.
>
> As I have said, the CCTld managers see these as separate events, and you
> would do well to uncouple them in both your mind and your rhetoric.

  This suggestion may well be a good one, but is more difficult given the
level of distrust that the ICANN BoD and staff have both engendered
and deserved of late sense MDR.

>
>
> The At Large seats will stand or fall on the basis of reaction to the ALSC
> report, Mike Roberts paper, the Nais report, and the Board's and other
> people's  perception of the existence and value of a real at Large
> membership and its likely contribution to ICANN narrow scope of management
> of Names and Numbers. The cost of reaching and maintaining this group is a
> further factor.

  First of all it has already been shown that costs relative to an At-Large
membership
is minimal despite it's size, but would be very difficult to be considered
legitimate
should ANY stakeholder be selectively excluded or Censored.

  As for Mike Roberts paper, a basic slur upon the DNSO GA in particular
IS, and should not be a factor in any rational person/stakeholders mind in
the makeup of the At-Large.  The ALSC's obviously skewed and well known
previously determined ideological bent, is NOT a representation of the
Forum's broad ranging consensus of comments expressed on that forum.

  The NAIS report/response to the ALSC's final Report Draft, was closer to
what the WHite Paper and MoU requirements for "All interested Parties"
as At-Large members, but in some specific areas of minor consequence
still falls short of the requirenements of the White Paper and MoU....

>
>
> OTOH, the ccSO is a force that has emerged under a true bottom up consensus,
> not only of those directly affected, but also with support from a majority
> of other constituencies.

  I don't believe that I have seen a supporting resolution for the formation
of a ccSO coming from any of the other constituency's.  If such a document
outlining your contention of such support could you please provide us
all with a pointer(URL) to it?

>
>
> Allocation of board seats to the ccSO is not the cause of any loss by the
> ALM.

  We [INEGroup] agree that the potential formation of a ccSO should not
in ANY way effect the number or percentage of seats on the BoD that
the ALM must obtain, which cannot be less than 50%.  If this would mean
additional seats on the ICANN BOD to achieve this goal, than that should be
done.

>
>
> However, if we can manage the process of re-structuring so that these events
> occur simultaneously, and thereby diminish any period of uncertainty or
> confusion, I think you will agree that is desirable. But please don't label
> them as cause and effect.

  The labeling of cause and effect is indeed seemingly what the present
ICANN BOD has hoist upon all of us.  Ergo, this is not only Eric's
concern, and certainly not of his doing.  The discussed or proposed
numbers don't lie...

>
> >
>
> Regards
> Peter Dengate Thrush
> Co-Chair, Montevideo ccTLD Meeting
>
> Senior Vice Chair
> Asia Pacific TLD Association
>
> --
> 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