Re: [ga] Blueprint to purge the critics

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

>
> IMHO only kids in kindegarten accept adult supervision and debates under
> adult control, adults do not. I am afraid that while the ERC first
document
> could have been promizing, the blueprint is the ICANN slow suicide. Anyway
> the GNSO GA is of no real interest, CCSO local GA are.

The recent ERC recommendations not only affirm the value of the GA but also
provide guidance how the forum can actually be made useful going forward.
The GA can be an effective body that actually contributes to ICANN's
mission. It is not currently. I believe that the recommendations provide a
very reasonable framework under which actual productive work can be
accomplished.

Your message demonstrates perfectly the current dysfunction. You make
sweeping generalizations critical of the proposal yet fail to provide any
clear input into how the proposal can be improved or provide an alternative.
This is not how functional organizations produce useful insight. This is why
the GA has failed to achieve relevance. This is why the status quo of the GA
is not acceptable.

There might be better ways to proceed, but in the absence of a better idea,
this is the only way to proceed.

-rwr

--
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