ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Re: Text of the motion...


On 3 May 2002, at 18:34, William X Walsh wrote:

> Friday, May 03, 2002, 3:00:26 PM, jeanette hofmann wrote:
> 
> > I support a rebid not because I expect the DOC to generate or 
> > negotiate a better structure next time but rather because the 
> > current ICANN structure lacks any form of accountability. Rebids
> > might be a way of compensating for this severe shortcoming. In the
> > unlikely case that we succeed in achieving a rebid, ICANN's 
> > successor might be less indifferent with regard to proper procedure
> > and consensus assertions.
> 
> Which is all fine and dandy, but the GA is not the proper vehicle for
> it.

According to its bylaws ICANN has no members. There is no 
formally accepted At Large membership. What other channel for 
expressing distrust would you suggest?
Moreover, in Accra I have lost the belief in the healing 
power of substantive bottom-up structures within the current ICANN 
framework.  

jeanette


> All you would do is kill the GA permanently, with no chance of it
> being anything substantive from that point forward.
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <william@wxsoft.info>
> --
> Save Internet Radio!  
> CARP will kill Webcasting!
> http://www.saveinternetradio.org/
> 


--
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 >>>