Re: [ga] your comments

[Dan Steinberg <synthesis@videotron.ca>]

danny,

At the risk of opening up several cans of worms, is there evidence to
support the 'no longer' attribute? 

I think we have been struggling since 1998 for evidence that the board
as a whole ever did.

My suggestion to all would be to not bother looking for something you
know you aren't going to find.
If you choose to work within ICANN, do so with open eyes and seek to
make a difference within the 'closed ' shop.

If you choose to vote for the 'broom' approach and a clean-sweep start
over with a rebid, then again, don't bother with the current mess except
to document it for purposes of the rebid.

Now...I've been thinking along these lines since 1998 and I have always
felt there is nothing wrong with maintaining these parallel tracks.  So
that is where I'm coming from.  Work to better things a small step at a
time....and when it becomes clear to enough people that change is better
than inertia, ...well...

This kinda parallels the vote we had in the GA.  People got a chance to
state that they want change from within and a rebid.  It's something
done in the legal profession all the time...you have a fall-back
position so not all  your eggs are in one basket, and you can do
'something' constructive all the time.



DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
> 
> Joe writes:  Today, many people marginalize themselves by taking a black or
> white approach -- e.g., direct elections are the only acceptable way to be
> accountable.
> 
> With all due respect, the question that one might ask is the following:
> After having budgeted $450,000 for an At-Large study, and after having been
> told by those charged with completing the year-long study (this included the
> former Chairman of ICANN), that "an At-Large membership registration and
> election process can be developed that meets standards of integrity, fairness
> and affordability" ( http://www.atlargestudy.org/final_report.shtml ), why
> has the Board not accepted the recommendations of its own Blue-Ribbon panel
> that reflects the consensus view of the community?
> 
> Aren't we a consensus-based organization?  Do we now have a Board that no
> longer respects consensus?
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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

-- 
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin		phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec		fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca
--
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