Re: [ga] Top Three Issues

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

You ask about the top issue; the one Rick denied to me :-)  To have a 
management doctrine of the ICANN consistenly fitting with the network 
nature and the market expectations.

ICANN misses such a doctrine, it has good will, amateurish inputs, greed. 
The result is that it does not know where is its real mission, hence 
mission creep. And that its positions are not consistent hence waste of 
time, money, interest and control.

The GA being made of individuals under ICANN influence is much worse. As 
long as we do not work together a network cultural consensus - what does 
not prevent disagreements - giving us unity and consistency in what we 
debate or analyse, the GA will have no capcaity to produce anything 
coherent and as such is of no interest (what does not mean that members are 
without interest, by far).

The only way to reach such a cultural consensus is to work on a common 
better understanding of the Internet reality (what irritates Rick) and in 
voting positions to force our thinking and a doctrine to emerge (when the 
last vote... where the results ... ).

Jefsey

On 22:18 02/12/01, DannyYounger@cs.com said:
>Rick Wesson has written to me asking, "would you mind posting the top 3
>issues the GA should be working on?"
>
>As a sense of focus is important to any organization, I thank Rick for his
>suggestion.  My thoughts are focused on representational issues...
>
>1.  The ICANN Board put forth the following resolution:  Resolved [01.132]
>that a Committee of the Board is hereby established, to be known as the
>Committee on Restructuring, to monitor and provide reports to the Board on
>these issues, and to evaluate and make recommendations to the Board
>concerning any specific proposals or applications to the Board that would or
>could affect the structure of ICANN or the composition of the Board.
>
>As the Board has also resolved [01.127] "that representation should accompany
>participation for informed, sustained involvement of interested individuals
>in ICANN policy and decision-making", and as the General Assembly is
>currently a disenfranchised institution without the right to vote in the
>DNSO, our membership should either be working on the details required to
>bring Roeland's motion (adopted by the GA) into fruition, or should
>acknowledge the GA as an unneeded structural redundancy in light of the
>coming establishment of the ALSO.  This is a time for self-organization and
>self-determination.  The GA will either act upon its own future, or it will
>have no future.
>
>2.  Patrick Corliss reminded us of the comment made by Adam Peake:  "The task
>force system should be abolished and all DNSO policy making conducted through
>the open processes: working groups".  These vile task forces have denied the
>membership of this Assembly their rights under the Bylaws for full
>participation in the substantive work of the DNSO.  In my view, it is time to
>take a stand on this issue, and I would recommend withdrawing all GA
>participation from every task force until such time as open working groups
>are fully restored.  As your thoughts may not accord with mine, other
>recommendations on the best way forward are welcomed.
>
>3.  Our promised nine seat At-Large representation on the ICANN Board is at
>risk.  Constituencies, like vultures, are lining up to feed on the carcass of
>the At-Large.  Every one of these interest groups is offering up a plan to
>enhance their own representation at the expense of the At-Large (which has
>been denied by ICANN even its own website within which it may organize its
>opposition).
>
>The ICANN Board has called for comments on the ALSC Final report.  Within
>ICANN we are the only group that does not seek to profit at the expense of
>the At-Large.  We have an obligation to defend the interests of the broader
>Internet community and must do so with an orchestrated campaign that
>demonstrates to this Board that we will not sanction abrogating the
>commitment made in our founding compact with the US government.
>
>
>Assembly members may have other opinions as to what constitutes the top three
>issues... this would be a good time to air such thoughts.
>
>--
>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