RE: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Rough Proposal C - eliminate NC, keepconstituencies

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

I just got back in town last night so this is a little delayed.

I think that Milton has probably the most salient point here, than all the
others combined.

We've all been witness to various capture algorithms, wrt ICANN/DNSO. IMHO,
this is the main reason we are having this WG now. The ICANN/DNSO gets
captured by a faction and all the disenfranchised factions stop wanting to
play. In business and engineering, one starts off with some sort of problem
description, followed a clear path to a requirements definition. Only then,
does one consider implementation details. We have all seen a few years worth
of wasted effort because we HAVEN'T followed that process.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milton Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu]
> Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 4:16 PM
> To: sidna@feedwriter.com
> Cc: wg-review@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Rough Proposal C -
> eliminate NC, keepconstituencies
> 
> 
> I'll make the same response to you, Greg, that I just made to 
> Joop. You are putting forward solutions before documenting 
> problems convincingly. It will be very easy for the people 
> who control NC and the Board to ignore recommendations that 
> they don't like. It will be harder for them to ignore a 
> detailed bill of particulars that shows how and why the DNSO 
> is dysfunctional. We can append to that bill of particulars a 
> series of ideas about how to fix it, but that could be an 
> open-ended list of the most popular ideas, leaving details to 
> a future WG.
> 
> >>> Greg Burton <sidna@feedwriter.com> 12/31/00 13:26 PM >>>
> Rough Proposal C - Eliminate the names council and keep the 
> concept of 
> "official" constituencies.
> 
> This is a rough proposal that takes a different, albeit 
> radical, approach 
> to the issue. I believe that this addresses many of the issues and 
> questions brought by the Board, recognizes the value of 
> "constituencies", 
> and provides mechanisms for improving both the DNSO functions 
> and output.
> 
> A. Proposal Structure and Process
>          1. GA to elect ICANN board members directly
>                  1 person, 1 vote
>                  all elected at once
>                  runoff election to 6 nominees
>                  top 3 elected
>          2. Formal Constituencies Continue to Exist
>                  a. rationale
>                          1. natural communities of interest
>                          2. recognition of a specific stake
>                          3. encourage diversity of processes and views
>                  b. proposed role
>                          1. Provide discussion forum for 
> constituency-specific concerns
>                          2. Develop constituency position papers for 
> ublication to the Board, the GA, and Working Groups
>                          3. Participate in the creation of 
> working groups
>                          4. Do outreach to currently 
> non-involved parties 
> who might have a stake
>                  c. creation and ongoing support
>                          1. Criteria for recognition
>                                  a. description of constituency
>                                  b. threshold # of GA members 
> who wish to 
> form it
>                                  c. immediate financial 
> contribution of 
> constituency (minimal = cost of setting up list, web
>                                     site, forums, and polls; 
> and hosting 
> for a year)
>                          2. Process of implementation
>                          3. Support requirements
>          3. GA to elect a chair and small exec committee
>                  a. role of chair
>                  b. role of executive committee
>          4. Working Groups provide the SO-wide research and consensus 
> development process on substantive issues.
>                  a. creation
>                          1. board request
>                          2. executive committee request
>                          3. constituencies request - 3 or more?
>                          4. GA request - threshold of 25 
> members requesting it?
>                  b. process
>          5. Financing and Resources
>                  a. secretariat
>                  b. funding
>                  c. required resources
> B. Questions and friction areas addressed by the proposal
>          Proper definition of GA function and role
>          facilitation of GA member participation in the GA
>          facilitation of Constituency member participation in the GA
>          facilitation of goals for constituencies
>          facilitation of consensus-building goals
>          inclusive representation
>          facilitation of outreach goals
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Greg
> 
> sidna@feedwriter.com
> 
> 
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html