Re: [ga] help please for icann-atlarge management

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Dear Bill,
There are two ways of considering the issues which are well shown by the 
.com  site : @large by ICANN permission (hence the provision and the split 
between DN owners and non owners) and by the .org site : @large by right 
and owning the ICANN.  You right about the first one. The second one will 
last as long as the ICANN concept will last. Two cooperating appraoches 
towards the saùme target: 50% of the BoD.
Jefsey

At 19:31 28/02/02, William S. Lovell wrote:
>The ICANN-AT-LARGE site has wisely included the caveat that the
>ICANN logo will be removed "if the Board decides in Accra not to
>support an At Large membership."  Should that occur, then the site
>"icannatlarge.com" will also be history. As I read the Lynn proposal,
>which claims to be all technical and not policy, there is no room for
>any individual participation and hence approval of any "At Large" is
>not likely. A different name for this group, and a correspondingly
>named web site, should be under active consideration. Being an
>eternal optimist, some time back I registered peopleworldwide.net
>and peopleworldwide.org, while peopleworldwide.com remains
>available.  In the event it became necessary, I would donate those
>domain names to what is presently ICANN-AT-LARGE, to
>someone who, on behalf  thereof, would host and manage the
>site(s) as Webmaster, and for that purpose peopleworldwide.com
>should also be acquired. by the present ICANN-AT-LARGE.
>
>The organization, particularly the first part in the drafting of its
>Charter (Name, Purpose and Mission Statement) then become
>the critical next step, which people should be seriously considering.
>(I'm assuming right now that the organization plays "counterpoint"
>to whatever ICANN becomes (unless it becomes far different
>from what the Lynn statement would make it), so a central issue
>will be how the organization will have any real effect on the
>Internet (individuals, of course, having had no effect whatever
>through ICANN).
>
>Bill Lovell
>
>
>Jefsey Morfin wrote:
>
> > Peter has proposed to host the ICANN AT LARGE sites so has Eric. Thomas too
> > but fitug.de seems to have a smaller organization than Peter and Eric.
> >
> > I have the addresses:
> > - icannatlarge.org blocked by a NetSol/Registrars problem
> > - icann-atlarge.com I will reroute to icannatlarge.com
> > - icann-atlarge.org
> > - icann-atlarge.net
> >
> > I temporarily host them and I hope this will be fixed today. I created the
> > mail.ican-atlarge.org account.
> >
> > I am not however able to go much beyond. I suspect that the size of the
> > final icann-atlarge.org structure that I have proposed:
> > - one central menu
> > - links to Joop's .com site
> > - links and support of cc.icann-atlarge.org local community @large sites
> > - local forums
> > - local chapter management tools
> > - polling services
> > will eventually call on a large system as Peter proposed and may be Eric in
> > part.
> >
> > 1. I do not want to manage such a project alone.
> >
> > 2. I suggest that due to the importance to the world, the site has a miror
> > (from Peter's to Eric's or the reverse) so the system is not said being
> > "hijacked" as some already say about the ".com" core.
> >
> > 3. I observe that the ALSC list is subject to ICANN system failures. This
> > kind of failure may happen at any critical time. So I wish to revive the
> > old http://groups.yahoo.com/group/icann-atlarge list as ONLY an
> > icann-atlarge site management group. Should only register there the people
> > interested in actuall machine and site management. I copy this list : if
> > you are on it and you are not interested please unsubscribe.
> >
> > 4. I will use the SIAT ( http://internationalsecretariat.org has a support
> > structure. I will display its banking account which should ONLY be used for
> > financial support to the hosting cooperatively managed by the icann-atlarge
> > list, not to any other action)
> >
> > This is carried as a contribution for france@lagre and from my tiny
> > world@wide foundation. I hope we can soon transfer the sites to a large and
> > stable system (currently on my lab machine) and that a board of "trustees"
> > may take over.
> >
> > I find that Cecily makes a tremedous job in term of oragnization
> > proposition. May be we could have a Charter and practical international
> > rules under her debated proposition, including the .com site management
> > council proposed by Joop and the open icann-atlarge cooperative management
> > of the .org sites, with a French incorporation carried with Olivier Iteanu
> > if he wants to take the lead (I strongly recommand the French or the
> > Belgium association status as the most suitable for such an operation -
> > light, tax exempt, string support by the Gov, quite no obligation).
> >
> > Thank you for your comments and help.
> > Jefsey
> >
> > --
> > 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