RE: [ga] Domain Tasting Reopened for Public Comments

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>]

Chris,
I am not denying anything, what you say is a completely different matter.
Can we stick to the point, please?
Dominik has asked the NCUC to revise their position on the basis of the fact
that the GA has a different opinion. I just pointed out that, as of today,
the GA has no evidence of having a position, therefore the statement was
incorrect. And I am just saying this for completeness of information for the
NCUC folks. Full stop.
If then the GA, via its Chair, or other, decides to run a straw poll, or
vote, or have a consensus document, or whatever, this could be used as
evidence of a position on the issue. In absence of that, the statement made
in the original post is incorrect.
Cheers,
Roberto

(last post of mine on the subject)



> -----Original Message-----
> From: chris@xxxxxx [mailto:chris@xxxxxx] 
> Sent: Thursday, 08 May 2008 00:04
> To: Roberto Gaetano; 'Dominik Filipp'; robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 
> nhklein@xxxxxxx; carlos.souza@xxxxxx
> Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ga] Domain Tasting Reopened for Public Comments
> 
> 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
> >

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>