RE: Numbers - was [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Joop
Teernstra
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 1:26 AM
To: ga@dnso.org
Subject: [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members


All this in about 12 days.

GA members should spread the word. There are no ready funds yet to finance
an outreach campaign. Only $16.900 in pledges.

First elections will be announced as soon as the supervisory Panel agrees
on the details. Nominations can already start now. See
www.icannatlarge.com/forum/

--Joop

Look Joop,
I object to these elections. Please pass this on to the "supervisory panel",
whatever that is and wherever that is. The priority for this At Large cannot
possibly be selecting a "Supervisory panel" or "editorial committee" for the
website or whatever the label is, when it is blindingly obvious what is
driving the site in the current climate, and it has nothing do with any
function that can be performed by a committee. It's all about *Numbers*.

Right now, the website is functioning more or less as a public news service,
(or ought to be) in that it seeks to confirm *numbers of public interested*
in the At Large and more than anything else, to undertake outreach and
*increase numbers* while performing a community service by offering a forum
to self-organize into groups so that a *number of stakeholder groups* can be
determined to exist. We don't need a committee to set that agenda - it is
already known. News programs are not run by committee. A departmental head
directs and manages other teams from the top down, delegating significant
powers to those teams who uncover key stories from the bottom to the surface
where the editor ensures they are aired.

The present climate is one of rapid change and as such, requires the GA, At
Large and all Constituencies to think on their feet, something that is not
possible if every decision has to go through a committee. The At large has
tremendous advantage over the NC, the GA, the IDNO, in that it is *not*
burdened by committees and structures.  Why replicate failure?

If anything is needed for the At Large website, it is *one* person - an
Editor, with communication skills to oversee the technical function of
webmaster, somebody with at least a credible amount of experience in public
service media, to ensure effective communication levels and balanced
coverage for minorities. That's all.

This Editor's core task is to attract *numbers*, and to encourage productive
use of the forum to self-organize into like minded groups, whether that is
domain name holders, non-domain name holders, regional assemblies, alternate
root users, offshore casino owners anonymous, or whatever. At the moment,
that is being hindered by a home page that does not point out that it is
necessary to sign up to the forum separately in order to communicate or
self-organize with other members, neither does it describe what the forum
can offer. Members have no way of even knowing which members are in their
region because no State/ County information is given, neither do they know
whether any announcements of efforts to self organize will be announced
through that list.

These are fundamental problems in communication with your public that can be
addressed by an Editor that knows what they're doing. They are observations,
not criticisms that I use to illustrate the point that you don't need an
elaborate series of elections to achieve what is necessary - particularly
when it aims to form a committee of amateurs who, with the best will in the
world, do not have the experience between them to replace one good Editor
with a track record.

Regards,
Joanna


--
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