ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Reaching Out

  • To: Richard Henderson <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Reaching Out
  • From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 16:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
  • Cc: General Assembly of the DNSO <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=Y9N/wd5wQnUPvsCi4pvQNr2gxHn09ezord7kYx47g6oBWtobxAxCuvcwT9w4yVzlwIwEyrTeNVlDVzwHS2tLXtf6tgzsx4Q8zq/lSpE5DnLsGGZLXtrrVQhjgOFuTuJ/k+Eg8xsahizZRtodKUf2dDxPIUzukwd+e5f/5wOF5Ts= ;
  • In-reply-to: 6667
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is socialist leaning. Ok, but know what it is.
 
e

Richard Henderson <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Wendy,
 
This makes so much sense. I've been saying and thinking for years that the At Large should be expanded and enlivened by approaching leaders of teaching unions, and university/colleges, and religious organisations (like the Church of England here in UK), and libraries (for posting public info sheets about the At Large), and student organisations --- approach people with influence, convince them, and get them to endorse the At Large to their members.
 
The At Large should be so much more than a dozen (largely techie types) who have been drawn together by ICANN (to be honest, for its own purposes and agenda).
 
The whole ALAC and RALO initiative needs to be reviewed, and to be honest, it is the participants of ALAC itself who should (en masse) present ICANN with what they want to be and start introducing more self-determination, rather than definition by Denise, ICANN and the whole Reform Agenda (which, frankly, sought to limit damage after the expulsion of elected At Large Board members.
 
I really support your suggestions in your post to the ALAC discussion list.
 
Yrs,
 
Richard Henderson
www.atlarge.org 
 
 
* * * * * * * * * *
http://forum.icann.org/mail-archive/alac/msg00967.html
 
 
For an addition to the agenda, can we confront the major question head-on: Is ALAC (and its ponderous ALS-RALO appendages) a meaningful, appropriate, or sufficient means for individual involvement in ICANN? After two years at it, I think the answer is no, but I think we're at least well placed to propose some better alternatives. What about jump-starting some other full-fledged constituencies to complement non-commercial: libraries, educators, registrants, privacy constituency? It's plain there are a lot of people who are burned out from trying to deal with ICANN, but many more might participate if given meaningful opportunities on par with commercial interests, rather than subordinate to them.



--Wendy

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>