[ga] Re: [At-Large] ALAC vote on RAA now open -- and it sucks

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Danny and all,

  Haven't many of us seen this sort of thing before?  I believe we have.
Yet history repeats itself again and again when it comes to ICANN.
Like a broken record.

  Further still, as the vast majority of Internet users are not aware of
the very existance of the ALAC, and those that are, are by some
skewed mechnism or personal vendeta not even able to cast a vote.
One than has to wonder how can ICANN under such contrived
mechnisims consider ICANN as an organization, able to properly
manage effectively or more importantly honestly, their stated
requirements under the MOU as this vote is curcial to those
responsibilities and the effect they may or will likely have on every
Domain Name holder perhaps far into the future.

Danny Younger wrote:

> So who do we have to thank for the totally biased language below?!!
>
> The phrasing of Point #3 is an insult to everyone that has worked hard to
> draw attention to the great many flaws in the proposed RAA amendments 
> package.  On what basis was the determination made: "but the ICANN Board 
> would probably not accept it"?  That's a bunch of crap.  The Board liaison 
> did not bring forward that viewpoint, nor is there a record of correspondence 
> with any Board members to assert that such is a board position.
>
> >From the ALAC Archives:
>
> "At the last ALAC meeting, it was decided to put the ALAC recommendation to
> the GNSO on the RAA package to an online vote. The online vote will remain
> open until Thursday, 18 December at 2359 UTC. Each member of the ALAC will
> shortly receive a private email with their voting credentials and a link to
> the online vote. They will be asked to choose between the following options:
>
> 1) Recommend the GNSO to defer because the briefing is required to
> understand the context
>
> 2) Recommend the GNSO to accept the current package, with the possibility of 
> further work on amendments on issues remaining continues
>
> 3) Recommend the GNSO to reject the amendments package and start from square 
> one, but the ICANN Board would probably not accept it
>
> 4) Abstain
>
> There's nothing more disgusting than the bald attempt to force through a 
> position vis-a-vis poorly drafted available choices.  It's contemptible.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln
"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827