Re: "stakeholders" was: Re: [ga] Re: ICANN before the US Senate...

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Leah, Karl, and all former DNSO GA members or other interested parties,

  I agree with you here as "People" in this construct is misleading
as to whom AND what IS a Stakeholder.  Stakeholders, are not
JUST individual "People" they are also entities that encompass
many individual "People" in various groups or groupings/entities
as well.



L. Gallegos wrote:

> On 10 Aug 2003 at 12:18, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
> >
> > So its better to use the right word in the first place.  We should say say
> > "people" when we mean people and not some indirect form, such as
> > "stakeholder" that is capable of being misconstrued.
> >
>
> Okay, sold.  I have no problem with using the word "people" based on the meaning
> of the US Constitution.  I have a problem with using the US Constittution as a basis,
> although it is probably the best possible construct.
>
> If you are willing to exclude the politics from the discussion and just say "people" -
> inclusive of all peoples, then we're in synch. :)
>
> Now, given that all people have an interest in ICANN's decision making, how do we
> go about ensuring they are able to assert themselves and have their rightful place in
> that function?
>
> >   --karl--
> >
> > [*] S.I. Hayakawa was a famous semantics expert.  (He was also, among
> > other things, a Senator from California.)
> >
> Yes, I remember the  Senator.:)

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard
===============================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801