Re: [ga] America at Large also denied ALS status

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

Such insincerity is matched only by ego and self agrandizement. Truly appalling and disgusting. Excuses are rampant amoung those in position. You approved the rules now you chastize them. No honor amoung thieves that profit from wrong.
 
e

Roberto Gaetano <ploki_xyz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don't want to get into the debate, on which I hold an opinion that is 
different from the one of Richard, but only bring to this list an element of 
fact.

While the application of Danny Younger was consciously rejected because the 
ALAC, or at least large part of it, thought it was not fulfilling the 
requirements, the rejection of the America at Large application was due only 
to the fact that some members did not vote in the required window of time, 
therefore not allowing a qualified majority to vote in favour.
To be honest, I feel terribly embarassed to have to report this: I don't 
think that it is at all acceptable that an organization fails to obtain a 
quorum on an email vote. However, the only action ALAC can take at this time 
is to accept the verdict, and prepare a proposal for changing the bylaws 
allowing the qualified majority of the members actually casting the vote, as 
opposed of the qualified majority of the members having the right to vote, 
be necessary for approval. At that point, I would recommend them to resubmit 
the application.

Incidentally, I still think that an application by the GA would be a *good 
thing*, and would be accepted (maybe with the modified bylaws would be 
safer).

Regards,
Roberto


>From: "Richard Henderson" 
>To: "Danny Younger" , 
>CC: 
>Subject: Re: [ga] America at Large also denied ALS status
>Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:38:18 +0100
>
>The logic:
>
>ICANN is merely the tool or instrument of the United States (to which alone 
>it is ultimately accountable).
>
>ICANN does not want accountability to a wider cross-section of Internet 
>Users around the world.
>
>Therefore ALAC was created to create a barrier to participation by 
>individuals who might call both ICANN and its US sponsors to account.
>
>ALAC has no voting power on the ICANN Board. ALAC has no individual 
>members. ALAC exists to keep individuals at arms length from ICANN's key 
>processes.
>
>Therefore: limit membership and make it impossible for individuals to 
>participate.
>
>Result: most individuals vote with their feet and depart.
>
>Effect on Participation and Forums: they are virtually dead.
>
>End Product: ICANN and USG carry on their symbiotic relationship 
>undisturbed.
>
>Yrs,
>
>Richard Henderson
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Danny Younger
> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: mike@xxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 6:14 PM
> Subject: [ga] America at Large also denied ALS status
>
>
> Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 13:26:17 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "RJGlass" 
>
>
>
>Hi Danny,
>
>I'm wondering if you can help me out on something?
>
>After pressuring, once again, ICANN for a decision on
>our ALS status (AmericaatLarge), I was just informed
>that we were denied certification...
>
>
>thanks,
>randy
>__________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com



		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
 Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.