[ga] RE: Bylaws Change Requested -- The At-Large Requires Representation

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Vint,

I share your view that a very small fraction of the
billion or so reported Internet users actually want to
provide input.  By the same token only a small
fraction of trademark holders, businesses and
non-commercial entities seek to provide input, yet we
do afford these constituent groups with an opportunity
for representation within the ICANN process.  The
At-Large, however, is a constituent part of the whole
that has been recently relegated to the sidelines.  We
are asking for the opportunity to function just like
any other constituent body -- with a venue to conduct
discussion and debate, and with the opportunity to
have a representative structure that conveys consensus
(or the lack thereof) to the Board on issues
pertaining to the DNS.

Best wishes,
Danny

--- Vint Cerf <vint@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Danny,
> 
> Setting aside the question of success or failure, is
> there a proposal for
> any alternative structure for user involvement in
> ICANN? My honest sense is
> that a very small fraction of the billion or so
> reported Internet users
> actually want to provide input. Do you see this
> differently?  I forwarded
> your message, verbatim, to the board.
> 
> 
> Vinton G Cerf
> Chief Internet Evangelist
> Google/Regus
> Suite 384
> 13800 Coppermine Road
> Herndon, VA 20171
>  
> +1 703 234-1823
> +1 703-234-5822 (f)
>  
> vint@xxxxxxxxxx
> www.google.com
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:29 AM
> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: vint@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Bylaws Change Requested -- The At-Large
> Requires Representation
> 
> Dear Vint, members of the ICANN Board, and members
> of the At-Large
> community:
> 
> Karl Auerbach writes in his blog:
> 
> "ICANN once had a vibrant public sector.  But that
> period ended several
> years ago when meaningful public participation in
> ICANN was eliminated
> during a process that ICANN, in its best NewSpeak,
> called "reform.
> 
> Today ICANN's palace eunuch, the "interim" ALAC sent
> forth it latest
> missive.  It is a pathetic document devoid of
> content yet filled with
> phrases of submission and dependency.
> 
> ICANN's purpose is to serve the public, the
> community of internet users.
> Yet ICANN's ALAC, and much less ICANN itself,
> remembers ICANN's purpose and
> ICANN's promises.
> 
> ICANN's ALAC was crippled at at its conception.  We
> of the community of
> internet users have patiently stood aside hoping
> that perhaps we would be
> proved wrong and that the ALAC might actually grow
> into something of value.
> During this time ICANN plied the ALAC with money and
> staff support.
> Attempts were made to froth-up up membership; but
> few signed on.
> 
> The ALAC was given a fair chance to succeed.  But it
> has not done so.
> 
> It is time to write off ICANN's ALAC as the failure
> it is."
> http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000197.html
> 
> I agree completely with Karl.  The ALAC has
> functioned as the steward of a
> process that replaced At-Large "representation" with
> the promise of enhanced
> "participation".  Yet during the course of the last
> three years, not even
> one comment on any topic whatsoever has ever been
> forwarded by any
> "certified At-Large Structure (ALS)" to the ICANN
> Board for review.  
> 
> By now it should be clear to all that the At-Large
> has routed around the
> ALAC having long recognized that it fails to act in
> our best interest.
> 
> The At-Large requires a better home within ICANN
> where our views may be
> properly debated and then forwarded to the Board
> through elected
> representatives.
> 
> Please consider this correspondence as a "bottom-up"
> request to change the bylaws.  We have waited long
> enough.  
> 
> Best regards,
> Danny Younger
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 	
> 		
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> 
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Music Unlimited 
Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/