Re: [ga] The BoD - Ratings and/or evaluations by stakeholders

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

Eric and all assembly members,

Eric Dierker wrote:

> Jeff,
>
> In answer to all of your questions and suggestions;
>
> Thank you for your input and work.
>
> Open - Meaning setting the method for rating as a 1 -10 and setting the basis as
> something as simple as "based upon your perception of how they do their jobs, with 1
> being the worst they could do and 10 being the best"

  Ok than I take it this rating/evaluation of the BoD is only based on
one general question?  And that question is "based upon your perception
of how they (the ICANN BoD) do their jobs?"  Is that about it Eric?

  Now how about the ICANN Staff?  Are you also suggesting that they
be evaluated as I ask and also suggested?  Please advise again.

>
>
> I really wanted to keep it more public perception oriented and not related to
> historical precedence.

  Public perception is at least in part going to be based on historical precedence.
No way to avoid that that I am aware of.  Do you know of one?  If so,
please be so kind as to provide it.

>
>
> It would be great if other groups also ran the ratings but I can only participate as
> a GA member.
>
> The term "War Chest" as I meant it, is a political term.

  Yes I understood that in my previous comments on this thread.

>  The thought being that
> after a few ratings people can go to it and use it as a pro and con for why they
> should be on the board.

  How about why the public/stakeholder perception of why any ICANN BoD
member should or should not be on the ICANN BoD?  Isn't that relevant?
We believe it is.

>
>
> I like that "etched in Jell-O".  No I did not mean the rating mechanism should not
> be solid and stable I simply mean at this time my position is very flexible
> regarding this endeavor.

  Ok so than this is "Etched in Jello".  Thank you for that clarification of your
thoughts on this idea.

>  Keep in mind I generally have to always do that because I
> require input from technical support to get it done.

  I think you mean you require Tech support expertise.  But ok...

>
>
> Jeff please keep in mind.  If I were sitting on the board and there were prospects
> of elections in which I could be dethroned and I really did not want the general
> public to see I just rubber stamped things I would take a dim view of this rating
> and probably try to politically crucify those responsible.

  Of course.  Hence my questions.

>  So let's go slow with
> this and see if we can keep my head a little ways away from the guillotine, I would
> appreciate it.

  Nope.  In for a penny in for a pound.  I give no one any quarter.  9/11
has thought us I hope that such a life style or political platform is
dangerous as well as foolish.

>
>
> OTOH we should get the BoD input because I think they could find out some useful
> things that would help them in their jobs.

  Unfortunately the "Boardsquatters" are doing a job that they were not elected
to do, nor does it seem reasonable that they should be doing that job until or
unless they become elected BoD members.  Ergo, such a tool is wasted to
that degree.

>  Unlike you, I find they are a responsive
> pleasant group that as a group has a diametrically opposed position from mine.

  I think I am pretty responsive.  The archives of this ML show that pretty
clearly, as do a number of court records.  Hence I am puzzled at your
evaluation of me.  Perhaps it is tainted?  On the other hand, I have found
as have thousands of our members, that the ICANN BoD and staff are
quite unresponsive.  This fact or perception has also been enumerated on
this Forum as well as a number of others and in the media.  Ergo me
thinks you have something else in mind to use this idea of yours for.

>  But
> that's ok I have friends that are atheists. We should work together on this because
> it can be a win win if done properly.

  Indeed it can be a win win if done fairly, openly, detailed, and with no other
political purpose in mind in particular.

>
>
> Again thanks for your efforts.
> Eric

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes 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:  972-244-3801 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