Re: [ga] RE: issues that are long closed?

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 04:59 p.m. 29/06/2007, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> Joop,
>
> The issue of individual representation is far from being closed, and the
> matter is on the agenda of the GNSO Review Working Group (incidentally, that
> only means it is being debated, not that it is going to be part of the
> recommendation).

Roberto,

It is a pity that you still see the need to hedge, even when admitting that 
that issue is not closed.

> Other issues, like for instance the direct election of Directors, is closed,
> at least for the foreseeable future.
>
> If we want to discuss how we can propose something to create an individual
> users or non-professional registrants constituency, we can do (actually, you
> might give input to the GNSO Review WG, the public comment period is open).

Done so.

> But you might want to acknowledge that there is a wide range of opinions on
> the matter, including the ones who do not see at all the need and usefulness
> of an individual representation, and that in the end the Board will decide
> based on the opinions of the seated Directors. Proposals that can have wider
> support will have a chance to be accepted, proclaims of all-or-nothing will
> be inevitably rejected because nobody else in the Board will join.
>
> If, on the other hand, you want to repeat the mantra of all the power to the
> people, and direct elections of Board representatives, my personal opinion
> is that there is little chance to be able to go anywhere.


What I said was that the issue had to be  "adequately addressed". Does not 
sound like "all or nothing" or any mantra to me.
I have posted my recommendation to the WG and let's see if it will be debated.

I believe it is now time for the Board to take a real initiative.

To those who do not see at all the need and usefulness
of an individual representation they can point to the thousands of postings 
of the unrepresented  Registerfly registrants.


-joop-