Re: [ga] Re: A Question for the Candidates

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Barbara and all former DNSO GA members or other interested parties,

Barbara Simons wrote:

> Dear Jeff et al,
> Please see my responses below.
> Barbara
>
> On 3/10/03 4:16 PM, "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > Barbara and all former DNSO GA members or other interested parties,
> >
> >
> > Barbara Simons wrote:
> >
> >> If I am elected to the ICANN Board, I shall work at making the Board and its
> >> decision making process more open, responsible, and transparent.  In
> >> particular, I pledge to:
> >>
> >>     * Be accessible and responsive to the members of the public;
> >
> > Does this part of you pledge include responsible to the members
> > of the public and/or any and all stakeholders/users as well?
>
> As a Board member, I would attempt to be responsive to all stakeholders and
> users, most certainly including members of the public.  Obviously, a single
> individual cannot communicate with thousands of stakeholders.

  Why do you believe that a single individual cannot communicate with
thousands of stakeholders?  I do it almost every day.  This very post
is going to 10's of thousands of stakeholders for example.

>  But I would
> do my best to be clear about my positions and to listen and be responsive to
> the concerns of others.
>
> >>     * Create an advisory group of experts in technological, policy,
> >> economics, and the law;
> >
> > Would such a advisory "Group of Experts" be open to any and all
> > that wish to participate?
>
> I would be looking for volunteers, but I would select the people who would
> be advising me, based on their expertise, their willingness to work, their
> ability to get along with others, and my comfort at interacting with them.

  Good answer.  Thank you...

>
>
> >>     * Work to build a decision-making process that is open and inclusive -
> >> and that involves two-way communications from the Board to the public and
> >> from the public to the Board;
> >
> > Very good here!  >;)
> >
> >>
> >>     * Establish well defined procedures that will allow sufficient time for
> >> people to read and comment on issues, proposals, and initiatives;
> >
> > Will any and all interested parties or stakeholders/users in your
> > pledge here also have the contracted right to also have a vote in the
> > determination of any issues, proposals, and initiatives taken as well
> > before considered a standard/regulation by ICANN in your pledge?
>
> I don't see how I could hold a vote on all issues and proposals.

  Well  you could have your own poll at a minimum.  See for instance:
http://www.vote.com/  Over 51,511,000 Votes Cast!  And that is just
one example.  I can of course provide many more if called upon to do so.

>  I have a
> track record of having spent years working in an organization with strong
> democratic principles - ACM.  I care deeply about the future of the
> Internet, and I would do my best to preserve the Internet as an open channel
> of communication.

  THe ACM is a very good organization.  I did notice however that
the democratic principal of one man one vote doesn't seem to be
well represented in the ACM via the internet.  Do you now, and
have you always supported that basic democratic principal?
I also recall that You came out recently strongly opposed to
EVOTING.  Are you still opposed?  If so, can you perhaps
explain why Evoteing (Safely and securely done) is a growing
and desired extension or use of the internet for stakeholders/users
and your opposition recently?

>
>
> >>     * Guarantee that policy decisions are initiated and made by the Board,
> >> not by the staff.
> >
> > Does this include technical policy as well?  Will any and all
> > stakeholders/usres
> > also have a vote before implementation or a decision of such policies are
> > adopted in your pledge?
>
> As I said above, I don't see how I can hold a vote of stakeholders.

Ok, perhaps you need some execution here.  Start with
http://www.vote.com/ and http://www.surevote.com/
than progress to  http://www.evote.com/polls_section/pollingcontents.asp
and http://www.vis.org/visweb/html/ratings.htm

>  As far
> as technical policy issues are concerned, it would depend on how much policy
> was involved with the technology.  We know that some technologies are
> relatively neutral, and others have significant policy implications.  It's
> the later ones about which I have the greatest concern.

  Agreed and understood.  That is why stakeholders/users need to
at least have the opportunity to vote on such issues and policies in
order for the BoD to have a true measured consensus by which
they can than better and much more robustly serve the stakeholder/user
internet community.  Don't you agree?

>
>
> >> One of the aspects of having well defined procedures is that issues would
> >> not be voted on without first providing the public with reasonable notice
> >> and the opportunity to comment.
> >
> > Comment is wonderful Barbara, but is often ignored not considered
> > seriously.  Hence comment only is not good enough.  Therefore,
> > unless or until any and all stakeholders/usres vote on any and all
> > regulations, standards, initiatives, proposals, and/or policies before
> > they can be adopted or otherwise enacted.  Hence the board
> > should act as a enforcement arm of ICANN as much as it does
> > a facilitator.
>
> If I am elected, I'll be only one member of the Board.  I'll do my best to
> bring about the creation of well defined and observed policies and
> procedures within ICANN.  Without such policies and procedures, it becomes
> impossible for small stakeholders and individuals to participate in the
> ICANN process, because they don't have the resources to read and respond to
> documents on very short notice.

  Agreed and yes such procedures are not currently present in ICANN
now.  That is one of ICANN's biggest failings.  The ALSC forum, now
dead of course, had many good and workable ideas presented to address
this short coming of ICANN's.  But that meant that 51% of the BoD
would need to be elected by the stakeholders/users.  This is the
direction that is being called for more and more, and shall continue to
be until or unless ICANN is accountable to the stakeholders/users
directly.

>
>
> >>  Votes would be made in public and the
> >> results, together with how the individual Board members voted, would be
> >> posted in a prominent location on the ICANN website.
> >>
> >> I am uncomfortable with the idea of requiring that all email among Board
> >> members be made public.  I think that such a step would inhibit the give and
> >> take that is required in order for a body to reach a negotiated decision.
> >
> > Why would such inhibit give and take?  It shouldn't..  Openness is
> > always the best policy and practice.
>
> I agree about openness in public meetings.  Additionally, I don't approve of
> policy decisions being made behind closed doors, and would adamantly oppose
> such an activity.  However, I also would need the ability to conduct off the
> record discussions with fellow Board members.  I understand your reluctance
> to go along with such a proposal, and my view is that ICANN is so heavily
> political that it will be impossible to achieve any of the goals that I've
> stated above if I am unable to engage in frank discussions with other Board
> members.

  Understood completely here Barbara.  So I think you missed my meaning
in my previous response.  Any discussions privately or otherwise with
fellow board members pertaining to ICANN activities, regardless of
how trivial, must be available for public review.  This however does
not mean that some (Hopefully few) would be discussed in a public
setting or forum.

>
>
> >> Based on my experiences of working with a group with a variety of opinions
> >> (the U.S. Public Policy Committee of ACM), I have found that I frequently
> >> need to engage in side email conversations with individuals in order to
> >> determine both what their primary concerns are and what kind of compromise
> >> might allow them to support a particular position.  These would be very
> >> awkward discussions to have in public, and I believe that my effectiveness
> >> would be reduced were I required to archive such discussions.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Barbara

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801


--
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