RE: [ga] Questions for Joe Baptista / Eric Dierker, and why the GA list should be ended

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

--- JFC Morfin <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> it seems that we have now the Commintern, the ICANN Travel Club, the 
> AmerICANN, the PDML, The Doctors Gang, and I suppose with you the 
> Excluding/Exclusive Club. OK. I have no objection to most of your 
> objections, except that I am not sure about your own "real
> objectives".
> 
> Could you please introduce them (no teasing meant. You explain 
> Danny's, I think we need to know yours').

Sure. Read the enumerated points at:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg00146.html

which followed up on:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg00138.html

It should have been crystal clear. One can start by renaming the list.
I've heard no opposition, and I'm in favour of it.....I hereby declare
a consensus exists. ;) Avri, do our bidding, and see that the list gets
renamed, please.

In summary, I'm just here to undo the damage that Avri caused, which
diminished the GSNO Council and its Chair relative to that of the
non-existent list currently known as the "GA List" (but presumbly not
for long).

> Also why would you be more 
> equal than Danny and waltz with Check Gomez, be entertained by 
> Verisign, and bore Tina Dam while he would be on the phone ?

I wouldn't be more equal. I would participate remotely. :) My point was
that if Danny earned the minimum wage per hour, for every hour spent
bemoaning ICANN not giving him travel funding, he could go to LA or
Paris on his own, if he wanted to. Personally, if ICANN spent a
fraction of its budget on improving remote participation (e.g.
Webex.com or comparable tools from Microsoft, etc.) they'd end up
saving more in the long run. Indeed, perhaps some of those companies
would even let ICANN do a meeting for "free", to test out the
technology and showcase it to an IT-savvy audience.
 
> IMHO what counts is that a job is to be done to the benefit of every 
> internet users. May be could we focus on:
> - which job each of you/us believe to be of importance
> - how best he/she can participate

Roberto already hinted at that....one can't have a free-for-all. Even
Wikipedia has rules. Debbie Garside (who has staunchly supported
Dierker and Baptista) is a member of the Wikimedia Foundation's
Advisory Board, and can probably discuss at length fallout over the
"Essjay" controversy regarding fake personas and credentials:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essjay_controversy
http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2007/03/head_wikipedian.php
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/piggy.html

Avri has created a situation of a similar nature. Avri refuses to even
acknowledge the existence of a problem. Avri, as Chair of the GNSO
Council which is responsible for this list, do you approve having as a
"List Monitor" someone who is on the record as saying:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg00152.html

"Therefore my time is better spent devising new methods to cause harm
to government."

"I think it appropriate to confirm police claims that I harass them. 
It makes me happy to watch them suffer, especially during difficult
economic times."

It's appalling that I even have to *ask* the question, but there you
have it. If Avri is shy, she need not even reply to this post....I
simply dare her to update the page at:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/

which authoritatively lists the voluntary monitors as:

"Thomas Roessler
Alexander Svensson
Ross Rader
Abel Wisman"

Updating that list, though, might be Avri's last act as Chair of the
GNSO, though, as I'm sure she's aware, there are lots of Council
members who lurk this list, and are aware of this fiasco, and are
waiting to see what she does next. As a gentleman, I've given her a way
out, simply renaming this list, for starters.

I would have expected someone who purports to be a "strong woman",
given her pro-feminist writiings:

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.feminism/msg/b7121397d5f90985

"i believe that as long as men are the cultural/power elite, it is
impossible for any sort of natural equality to come about.  it is
probably necessary to create a power reversal in order to be able to
some day come to actual equality.  if the female spouse in a
relationship does not have the dominant position, then the male
dominates by virtue of societal pressure.  in order for equality to
someday happen, men must abdicate, as much as possible, the advantages
of their gender and freely subject themselves to their spouses
control." 

wouldn't be trying to hide, and further reduce the leadership stature
of GNSO Chair.

[Personally, I'm very pro-women's right; anyone who has a mother,
sister or wife should be; but, I think advocating that "men must
abdicate....to their spouses control" is kooky stuff -- equality should
be the goal, not a new inequality]

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/