Re: [ga] Problems/Conclusions

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

Joanna,

We've had this debate before on other forums at other times, but if you 
believe there is some benefit in further discussing these points on the GA 
list then I will be happy to join you in further dialogue.

You have asked, "Why would those who have signed up to AtLarge.com endorse 
you as a member of the At Large Committee if you do not even mention them as 
part of the plan?"  I wasn't aware that I needed either their endorsement or 
nomination.  If David Farber or Ralph Nader or Hillary Clinton decided to 
answer the call for volunteers to join the At-Large Organizing Committee, 
would you turn around and say "I'm frightfully sorry, but the members of a 
group called icannatlarge.com have not endorsed your participation...  I'm 
sorry that you weren't told that this was a prerequisite for engaging in this 
charitable work, but without our endorsement you simply can't be a 
volunteer."  Rather elitist attitude, isn't it?  Sort of reminds me of a 
Board that thinks that only they are entitled to make nominations.

You wonder why I haven't mentioned icannatlarge.com in my last note.  
Frankly, I didn't see the necessity.  Groups like CECUA and PFIR, among 
others, have made public statements on ICANN Reform.  icannatlarge.com 
hasn't.  Their membership hasn't even had the initiative to forward a 
structural plan that included the At-Large component for consideration.  I 
can just imagine the next Resolution from the Board:

Whereas in Resolution 02.23 the Board strongly encouraged comments and 
suggestions relating to ICANN evolution and reform from all stakeholders to 
the Committee as soon as possible;
Whereas no substantive comments or reform plans pertaining to the At-Large 
were submitted by any representatives of the At-large community prior to the 
deadline established by the Committee on Evolution and Reform;
Whereas the ICANN Board is concerned by this lack of input and believes that 
such lack of commentary is demonstrative of the futility of further pursuing 
the concept of At-Large representation;
It is hereby Resolved that the At-Large shall not be constituted as a 
"structure" within ICANN, but rather as a participatory "mechanism" to be 
administered by the President and his Staff.

No, I don't hold the non-contributory efforts of the icannatlarge.com 
membership in high esteem.  Yes, the organization may have other merits, but 
putting together a plan to properly constitute the At-Large within the ICANN 
organizational plan doesn't appear to be among their skill-sets.  I don't 
recall noting any suggestions as to how directors are to be selected in the 
absence of global online elections, nor any recommendations on how other 
organizations that are equally part of the At-Large will be integrated into 
the mix.  In short, I have seen very little substantive commentary from the 
membership of that group, and the mere fact that a bunch of people signed up 
on a list without having to tender any cash doesn't impress me all that much. 
 I have seen much longer lists of names and a great deal more dialogue just 
by perusing SLASHDOT on a daily basis.  How many comments does the forum get 
a day?  Perhaps three, if you're lucky?  Big deal.  Maybe you're enamoured 
with this degree of interaction...  I am not.

An Organizing Committee for the At-Large will be convened by ICANN staff 
under the administration of Denise Michel.  It is not a certainty that either 
I or Eric Dierker will have our request to participate accepted -- we don't 
set the rules, we simply have to abide by them.  ICANN will make some kind of 
decision as to which volunteers will be on this committee and which will be 
excluded.  I might well fall into the latter category.  In any event, at 
least we volunteered to attempt to do something constructive... how many 
members of icannatlarge.com have done the same?  

If you don't want to do the work yourself, why are you attempting to get in 
the way of those that are willing to make an effort on behalf of the 
At-Large?  What is your agenda?

--
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