Re: [ga] Domain Tasting Reopened for Public Comments

[<chris@xxxxxx>]

Roberto, how about setting up a poll where all members of the ga list can 
answer and show they have a consensus one way or the other. And Roberto, the 
ga has had positions in the past that were practically unanimous and the 
recommendations were still ignored, so maybe it really does have something 
to do with top down management after all. History chows that to be the case. 
To deny that is to pretty much just be lying.
Chris McElroy


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Dominik Filipp'" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>; <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
<nhklein@xxxxxxx>; <carlos.souza@xxxxxx>
Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 5:37 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] Domain Tasting Reopened for Public Comments


> I was just noting that you did tell the NCUC representatives that the GA 
> has
> a position, while in reality this is not supported by facts.
> Maybe this is the main reason why the GA is not taken seriously, and the
> top-down vs. bottom-up has very little to do with it.
>
> Cheers,
> Roberto
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dominik Filipp [mailto:dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Tuesday, 06 May 2008 12:31
> > To: Roberto Gaetano; robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; nhklein@xxxxxxx;
> > carlos.souza@xxxxxx
> > Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [ga] Domain Tasting Reopened for Public Comments
> >
> > Roberto,
> >
> > They are those regularly contributing to the GA who are not
> > addicted to personal career, financial interests, benefits or
> > false timid loyalty.
> > No, you have not missed anything. Neither a straw poll nor a
> > common decision has been, unfortunately, issued yet.
> >
> > If they were they would be ignored much like all others in the past.
> > That is the main reason why many formerly active contributors
> > are feeling frustrated and are not willing to participate on
> > the game played on the public.
> >
> > By the way, the only official relevant straw poll results
> > gathered so far at GNSO having gained a majority (110 votes,
> > 64%) votes in favour of the AGP elimination have been
> > similarly brushed away, not worth mentioning in the Final
> > Report. Do you really think you would be interested in a
> > straw poll conducted on the GA?
> >
> > I just want ICANN to be honest and say it in fact prefers the
> > top-down instead of the bottom-up. And, that public input can
> > be prospectively considered at sole discretion of the staff
> > and the board. Get rid of all those core values related to it
> > and that's it. It would be clear and fair. I would accept it.
> > I would say ok, bye-bye, and would leave ICANN definitely.
> > But please do not play (I mean all ICANN staffers here) that
> > transparent game on us. It is already embarrassing.
> >
> > ICANN needs self-confident people in constituencies who are
> > not frightened and scared of expressing and standing for
> > their own opinions.
> > Do not mistake compromise for backdown. A compromise is made
> > as a result of proper deliberation on reasonable and valid
> > arguments presented by constituencies and public input on
> > equal basis. How can we be deliberating on something that was
> > excluded from discussion from the very beginning?
> >
> > Roberto, you are at the second highest position at ICANN. Get
> > involved in the increase of the public participation if, of
> > course, you find it important. ICANN has been at crossroad
> > for some past years; either it will follow the existing
> > hidden top-down model or try making it an open organization
> > with influential public participation. You can influence it.
> >
> > Dominik
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:roberto@xxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 11:48 PM
> > To: Dominik Filipp; robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; nhklein@xxxxxxx;
> > carlos.souza@xxxxxx
> > Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [ga] Domain Tasting Reopened for Public Comments
> >
> > Dominik Filipp wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > We on the GNSO GA, however, believe the motion is insufficient and
> > > still vulnerable to possible abuse.
> >
> > We who?
> >
> > If there was some decision in this sense, or at least a straw
> > poll, I missed it.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Roberto