<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] RE: GA irrelevant
- To: GNSO GA Mailing List <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [ga] RE: GA irrelevant
- From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 14:19:28 -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 name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18904"></HEAD>
<BODY id=compText>
<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 name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18904">
<P>Eric, Avri, and all,</P>
<P> </P>
<P> I am also not much for lotteries. But some, especially in the
EU are. >;) Further</P>
<P>the fact that the GA still exists is in and of itself a miracle, so Avri is
right in</P>
<P>assuming such events occur and have in the case of the GA. </P>
<P> </P>
<P> As to the notion of the GA being rational, I can only say that what
is and what </P>
<P>is not rational is a matter of opinion to some degree or another. If
indeed there are those</P>
<P>that are of the belief that the GA as a group are not rational by in large,
I would</P>
<P>disagree. But I would agree that there have been less than rational
suggestions</P>
<P>expressed by GA members from time to time. I am sure many would say
that</P>
<P>the GNSO and other constituencies have had, and still do occasionally
have,</P>
<P>less than rational suggestions or recomendations as well. Such is
life...</P>
<P> </P>
<P> So what did we solve here in this discussion that has not already
been</P>
<P>known or solved/recognized? My answer is that the gist of this
discussion</P>
<P>is mostly based on entrenched attitudes that have been hashed many times</P>
<P>before but still remain in the minds of some as extant. Let's move
on, I say.<BR>Simply holdong the same attitudes/beliefs rarely moves
anything forward...</P>
<P> </P>
<P> Fully re-recognizing/reinstating the GA as a GNSO body moves things
forward, </P>
<P>and does so in a positive and rational manner...<BR><BR></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px;
MARGIN-LEFT: 0px">-----Original Message----- <BR>From: Hugh Dierker
<HDIERKER2204@xxxxxxxxx><BR>Sent: May 27, 2010 7:50 PM <BR>To: GNSO GA Mailing
List <GA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Avri Doria <AVRI@xxxxxxx><BR>Subject: Re: [ga] RE: GA
irrelevant <BR><BR>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top>I think that we should plug away and remain. I have known many
here for over a decade. When an issue presents itself that folks want to
rally behind they will and our existing dormant protocol will be
ready. Usually miracles come in the form or response to a critical mass crisis,
not simply for the lottery.<BR><BR>--- On <B>Wed, 5/26/10, Avri Doria
<I><avri@xxxxxxx></I></B> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px;
MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><BR>From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx><BR>Subject: Re:
[ga] RE: GA irrelevant<BR>To: "GNSO GA Mailing List"
<ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 5:25 AM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail><BR>Hi,<BR><BR>As always, you are asking for the
miracle. And I think that is good.<BR><BR>I see the miracle as coming in
two flavors:<BR><BR>1. The GA actually organizes itself into a rational and
functional group, one that has a structure and can actually produce coherent
comments on the issues in ICANN. Such a group would make its own niche
and if it really proved its worth it could eventually get a seat at the
table. I certainly don't think this group in its current form deserves
any seats anywhere. But maybe with work and a miracle it
could.<BR><BR>2. If the GNSO was reorganized to include a fifth stakeholder
group - individual registrants.<BR><BR>Then again, does the GA want to only
comment on GNSO issues? Hasn't the field of interest grown beyond just
the gTLD topics? does anyone care about the treatment of ccTLD
registrants? does this group have opinions on global omnibus DNS-certs
being created in ICANN? is the GA concerned about IDN and especially
synchronized IDNs whether they be G of cc or ...? what about the campaign
to force people to evangelize IPv6? AOC and comments for the review
teams?<BR><BR>If GA is going to work toward a miracle, it might be better off
orienting itself toward becoming a real rational functional force in
itself. It could happen, miracles do happen.<BR><BR>a.<BR><BR><BR>On 26
May 2010, at 04:52, Karl Auerbach wrote:<BR><BR>> On 05/25/2010 09:19 PM,
Avri Doria wrote:<BR>> <BR>>> Non commercial registrants don't need a
miracle. The Noncommercial<BR>>> Stakeholder Group (NCSG) already
allows for individual noncommercial<BR>>> registrants to apply for
membership.<BR>> <BR>> It's easy to box those legal fictions known as
"corporations" and "associations" and "partnerships" into commercial (or not)
boxes - that's because their formation and legal existence is premised on their
engagement in economic activities.<BR>> <BR>> But human registrants don't
fit nicely into the "commercial" and "non-commercial" buckets. We people
simultaneously bathe in the stream of commerce and the stream of non-commercial
life.<BR>> <BR>> It's rather Procrustean to cut and stretch us in order
to fit us onto ICANN's "non-commercial" iron bed.<BR>> <BR>> For example,
my "cavebear.com" is used by me for both commercial and non-commercial
purposes. I am just as much at home in ICANN's commercial groups as in
the non-commercial ones.<BR>> <BR>> And one's activities may change their
color over time - for instance things like Google started out as non-commercial
experiments by individual people.<BR>> <BR>> (By-the-way, I agree with
Roberto that the burden of moving forward is on the aspirants to form the new
group. I was just suggesting that ICANN's board give a nod of
encouragement.)<BR>> <BR>> --karl--<BR>> <BR>>
<BR><BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Jeffrey
A. Williams<BR>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 300+k 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
>>>
|