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

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sotiris and all former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,

I also hope that my response to Sotiris's remarks do not in any way color
or prejudice anyone's remarks on this subject/thread.

The WG's to which Sotiris kindly referenced were a good idea that went
bad due to censorship of participation at the time.  Such was noted on
this forum by myself and many other interested stakeholders/users.  As such
the conclusions reached were skewed accordingly.  Therefor unless such
Working Groups (WG) and completely open and transparent to any and
all wanting and wishing to actively and freely participate, than reasonable
conclusions and potential subsequent actions thereof cannot be determined.

sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Dear Dr. Cerf,
>
> My comments inline below.
>
> Danny Younger wrote:
>
> [Note: I have had my differences with Mr. Danny Younger on numerous issues
> and his handling of them, none of which colour or prejudice my comments.]
>
> > Dear Vint,
> >
> > In my time as an ICANN participant I have taken note
> > of the degree of participation within three
> > organizations:  the DNSO GA, the IDNO, and
> > icannatlarge.  Each of these groups attained mailing
> > list numbers that only mildly exceeded 1000
> > participants.  When I compare this activity to that
> > found within the ISPs, the BC, the NCUC and the IP, I
> > am proud to see a much higher degree of involvement
> > (even the registrars don't get more than two or three
> > dozen entities participating in a vote).
>
> Indeed, the DNSO GA, the IDNO, and icannatlarge mailing lists were quite
> active however the noise to signal ratio was quite asymmetrical and little
> was actually accomplished.  Instead of those models, I would like to
> remind you of the public mailing list working groups, particularly the
> DNSO Review.
>
> Having 'whet my teeth' as the DNSO Reveiw WG's extended deadline
> facilitator ("interim" or "working chair" see:
> http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-review/Arc02/msg03003.html) of the DNSO
> Review after Greg Burton's ungracious and hurried deposit and exit; I wish
> to remind you how the DNSO Review Working Group continued on for a month
> as an example of a productive public (i.e. grassroots) organ of ICANN
> policy
> recommendations bodies (and an international one at that).  From Thu, 15
> Mar 2001 to Mon, April 16, 2001 the DNSO Review produced the following
> Recommendations to the Board:
> http://forum.icann.org/dnsoreview1/3ADB39BF00000043.html
>
> It is my firm opinion that no other public organ of the ICANN produced a
> more candid, inclusive and condensed set of recommendations regarding the
> perceived problems inherent in the relevant ICANN structure at the time of
> its drafting.  I think this is quite a significant phenomenon and IMHO
> deserves to be revisited.  ICANN is in a unique (and one could even say
> 'perilous') position vis a vis its role in Internet Governance.  Perhaps
> this is one of those times when it might be prudent to take one step back
> in order to make two forward?  Food for thought, anyway.
>
> >
> > We both know that a constituent body may be launched
> > with a great amount of fanfare and that initial
> > signatories to such an effort may be many, but
> > certainly it will not be an unmanagable number -- as
> > recent organizational history has shown -- and over
> > the course of time those numbers invariably will drop.
> >
> > I am suggesting that the Board allows for the
> > formation of a new constituency -- an At-Large
> > Assembly.  Member management would become the
> > responsibility of the constituency, not ICANN, so the
> > ICANN concern over a possible 80,000 new voices
> > becomes a moot point.
>
> Dr. Cerf, I look forward to seeing you in Canada once again, in Vancouver
> this time around.  I hope you will at least entertain the thoughts
> expressed by Mr. Younger, Richard Henderson, Chris McElroy, myself and
> others.  I believe the international public may actually have something to
> offer ICANN.      I believe the time for an At-Large constituency has
> come, it is my hope you will share such an opinion, or at least, entertain
> the thought.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> Toronto, Canada

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obediance of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827