<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] RE: GA Very Relevant
- To: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>, Accountability Headquarters <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx, cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [ga] RE: GA Very Relevant
- From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 17:12:04 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
<HEAD>
<STYLE>body{font-family:
Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-color:
#ffffff;color: black;}p{margin:0px}</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16825" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=compText>
<P>Eric and all,</P>
<P> </P>
<P> I gave you one already on 05/13/10, see again: <A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg04002.html";>http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg04002.html</A></P>
<P>You can also easily do a search on a "Good Search Engine" <
Something other than Google >,</P>
<P>on 'online voting software', and get some very good results. For the
record, I don't recommend any </P>
<P>particular providers on voting software other than to stay away from PHP
script based products for</P>
<P>security and privacy reasons, and so that such does not become an attractive
target for cyber-terrorists</P>
<P>or other criminal elements. Low hanging fruit such as online voting
mechanisms, are prime targets as are</P>
<P>social web sites, ect., ect... A significantly/strongly secure web
site for operating/running such</P>
<P>voting software is also a must as is Anonymous voting and registration, by
recent US law. This means</P>
<P>that initial setup can get a bit costly - $50k - $150k initially, but that
is one time cost that can be</P>
<P>prorated over time and if the GA decides to register as a non-profit corp.
or a LLA. garnering initial</P>
<P>funding isn't even in these financially difficult times, too difficult a
burden even though I suspect</P>
<P>a bit more than half of it will need to be borrowed $$ to which someone will
need to take financial</P>
<P>responsibility for in some fashion.</P>
<P><BR><BR><BR> </P>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff
2px solid">-----Original Message----- <BR>From: Hugh Dierker
<HDIERKER2204@xxxxxxxxx><BR>Sent: May 13, 2010 5:53 PM <BR>To: Accountability
Headquarters <GA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
"Jeffrey A. Williams" <JWKCKID1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Cc: Rod Beckstrom
<ROD_BECKSTROM@xxxxxxxxx><BR>Subject: Re: [ga] RE: GA Very Relevant <BR><BR>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top>
<DIV>Good Jeff, very very good.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Please openly and transparently send to me on this list 3 recommended
voting/poling links.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I anticipate paying for these myself all openly here in the GA. So think
cheap and think private because we have those who will not vote if others
know.<BR><BR>--- On <B>Thu, 5/13/10, Jeffrey A. Williams
<I><jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: Jeffrey A. Williams
<jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Subject: Re: [ga] RE: GA Very Relevant<BR>To:
"Hugh Dierker" <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>, "Accountability Headquarters"
<ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx<BR>Cc:
"Rod Beckstrom" <rod_beckstrom@xxxxxxxxx><BR>Date: Thursday, May 13,
2010, 2:46 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=yiv1628446407>
<STYLE>#yiv1628446407 {font-family:Geneva, Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif;font-size:10pt;font-family:arial,
sans-serif;background-color:#ffffff;color:black;}#yiv1628446407
p{margin:0px;}</STYLE>
<DIV>Eric and all,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Now this is the right sprit! Well done Eric! First
though we must bring back Dr. Joe. </DIV>
<DIV>We must stand by International principals and norms such as censorship is
bad, openness,</DIV>
<DIV>transparency and freedom of speech is good! That individual privacy
and security for all</DIV>
<DIV>GA members as well as registrants is good, and abragation of same is bad,
ect., ect...</DIV>
<DIV>We can set up our own voting mechnisims easily enough. Will ICANN or
the GNSO</DIV>
<DIV>approve? Maybe, and maybe not? If not, we try again hopefully
with a/or reason(s) why</DIV>
<DIV>the GA's efforts are not recognized or accepted by
ICANN/GNSO.<BR><BR><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff
2px solid">-----Original Message----- <BR>From: Hugh Dierker <BR>Sent: May 13,
2010 4:03 PM <BR>To: Accountability Headquarters <BR>Cc: Rod Beckstrom
<BR>Subject: Re: [ga] RE: GA Very Relevant <BR><BR>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top>
<DIV>The answer has always been right here. I mean right here. Set the
voting mechanisms up for us here. We will do the work to bring together the
documents necessary for filing and applying for these constituencies. We are a
part of the GNSO. We are ancient. And best of all we can vote my ne'er do well
sorry self out of here.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This would work for all participants. The organization would be formed
here so that in its infancy it would have no capture issues. The GA would
remain whether the one or two Constituencies prevail or not -- and can even
reform and try again if unprevailing. Input can then be had from all in a
General Assembly forum so that how the formation effects and affects all can be
open and transparent. Consensus here would be open to all and give an even
greater sense of public contribution to the process. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I believe this could have a positive influence from outside to inside and
inside to outside of ICANN. An actual GA is perfect for a corporation that has
no membership or stockholders. It does not dilute other interests. It
does not draw away from ongoing progress in other departments. Think of it not
so much a General Assembly but rather General Admittance.<BR><BR>--- On <B>Thu,
5/13/10, sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <I><sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx></I></B>
wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Subject: Re: [ga] RE: GA irrelevant<BR>To:
ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR>Date: Thursday, May 13, 2010, 11:42 AM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail><BR>Yes, Roberto, please answer Andy's question and then
please revisit my<BR>question on SPECIFICS: How must registrants organize
themselves in a<BR>manner that will be acceptable to ICANN? Will ICANN fund a
voting<BR>mechanism, for instance?<BR><BR>Sotiris Sotiropoulos<BR><BR>Andy
Gardner wrote:<BR>> I trust ICANN will be funding this from the per-domain
tax already paid by<BR>> Registrants?<BR>><BR>> On May 12, 2010, at
4:50 PM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:<BR>><BR>>><BR>>>
Sotiris:<BR>>><BR>>>><BR>>>> So, why don't you tell us,
finally, how we should go about<BR>>>> organizing ourselves in a
manner that would be acceptable.<BR>>>> Please be as specific as
possible.<BR>>><BR>>> I thought I already did.<BR>>> Since
the changes to the GNSO structure, proposed by the GNSO Review WG<BR>>>
and<BR>>> the SIC, have been approved by the Board, there is the
concrete<BR>>> possibility<BR>>> of creating a constituency for
registrants. Creation of new<BR>>> constituencies<BR>>> has even
been encouraged last year.<BR>>> This is a new opportunity, something
that did not exist in the past.<BR>>> It is now up to the registrants on
this list or anywhere else to decide<BR>>> whether they want to take
advantage of this opportunity or not.<BR>>><BR>>>
Cheers,<BR>>>
Roberto<BR>>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR><BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Jeffrey
A. Williams<BR>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders
and growing, strong!)<BR>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom"
-<BR> Abraham Lincoln<BR><BR>"Credit should go with the performance
of duty and not with what is very<BR>often the accident of glory" - Theodore
Roosevelt<BR><BR>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the
burden, B; liability<BR>depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied
by<BR>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."<BR>United States v. Carroll
Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]<BR>===============================================================<BR>Updated
1/26/04<BR>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of<BR>Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.<BR>ABA member in good
standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR>Phone:
214-244-4827<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|