<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] [fwd] [council] Draft conclusions of NC discussion on ICANN reform - scope (from: philip.sheppard@aim.be)
- To: ga@dnso.org
- Subject: [ga] [fwd] [council] Draft conclusions of NC discussion on ICANN reform - scope (from: philip.sheppard@aim.be)
- From: Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 15:31:28 +0100
- Mail-Followup-To: ga@dnso.org
- Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
- User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.0i
For your information. Philip's message with the full draft
conclusions should be available from the Names Council List's web
archives.
--
Thomas Roessler http://log.does-not-exist.org/
----- Forwarded message from Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org> -----
From: Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
To: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@aim.be>
Cc: "NC (list)" <council@dnso.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 15:30:15 +0100
Subject: Re: [council] Draft conclusions of NC discussion on ICANN reform - scope
Mail-Followup-To: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@aim.be>,
"NC (list)" <council@dnso.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.0i
On 2002-03-28 14:33:13 +0100, Philip Sheppard wrote:
>The Names Council felt that the greatest danger of mission creep
>lay in the areas of security, consumer protection and the creation
>of infrastructure for at-large membership.
I object against mixing draft conclusions which specifically address
ICANN's mission with remarks on one particular model for public
participation with ICANN.
The risks and benefits of an at large membership can (and should) be
discussed and addressed when the names council considers mechanisms
for the selection of board members, and for structuring public
input. In such a discussion (to which I'm looking forward), an
at-large membership should be considered together with alternative
options, such as the Lynn proposal's idea of governmental
involvement with the nomination of board members (which would, most
likely, also have a large impact on possible mission creep).
Please remove the words "and the creation of infrastructure for
at-large membership" from the draft conclusions.
>Recommendation 2. ICANN's mission should not be extended beyond
>that outlined in the note "What ICANN Does" .
Kind regards,
--
Thomas Roessler http://log.does-not-exist.org/
----- End forwarded message -----
--
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|