<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] RE: Bylaws Change Requested -- The At-Large Requires Representation
Chris and all former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,
I did not start this subject thread, Danny Younger did. I never have thought
that Vint or any other single person could or even should have the level of
influence you suggest. Still don't. But I believe that as this subject thread
was predominantly directed at Vint, it is clear that Danny does. Hence
another problem or concern. Either Danny believes that Vint or some
other single individual should or does have such influence, or Vint
actually does in Dannys mind.
In any event, I agree that Sotiris's remarks as to method are a good idea,
but that the execution of same must be open and transparent to the extent
that any and all interested parties and/or stakeholders/users can participate
freely and openly. The WG's were not conducted in that manner, and as
a result were skewed or ineffectual as a result of selected censorship.
kidsearch wrote:
> You seem to put a lot on Vint by himself. Do you think he can just walk in
> and tell the board, "Look here, because of what I just read, here is how
> things are going to be."
>
> Unfortunately that isn't how it works. If Vint were to embrace the working
> group plan or other individual participation plan it would carry weight and
> it is my hope that he will see that we are suggesting rational solutions to
> the problems ICANN faces. It is of benefit to ICANN to create a body that is
> truly representative of those individuals who wish to participate in the
> process.
>
> Insulting them will not get it done. We've all tried that approach. Real
> solutions cannot be ignored for long because they carry their own weight. I
> realize that some individuals here HAVE been giving real solutions and feel
> they have been ignored.
>
> In large part, we've given them excuses to ignore them in the past because
> we disagree so much with each other on rather minor points. That makes it
> easy for them to say "well they can't even agree among themselves, why
> listen to them."
>
> I'm not saying it will definitely work, but if everyone can get on the same
> page and focus on the things we DO all agree on, maybe we can gain their
> respect and attention. When you disagree with someone 99% of the time, you
> have to focus on the 1% you do agree on to make any progress.
>
> If that doesn't work, then revolt!
>
> Chris McElroy, President,
> Kidsearch Network
> http://www.KidsearchNetwork.org
> http://www.MissingChildrenBlog.com
> http://www.RunawayTeens.org
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <vint@xxxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "icann board address"
> <icann-board@xxxxxxxxx>; "Kathy Smith" <KSMITH@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 3:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [ga] RE: Bylaws Change Requested -- The At-Large Requires
> Representation
>
> > Chris, and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
> stakeholders/users,
> >
> > You hit on an old wound here Chris. Perhaps before your time in the
> > early days of ICANN. ICANN is supposed to be a nonprofit
> > california corporation. ICANN is as you say VERY interested in
> > a membership which can generate funds for ICANN as they have
> > been very unsuccessful at garnering donations. Perhaps this is
> > one of several reasons for Vint's concerns about a large number
> > of "At-Large" members whom do not have the money to pay
> > a membership fee that would be adequate in Vints mind or thoughts
> > to justify an "At-Large" membership with real power such as a vote
> > and a voice.
> >
> > Indeed your also right IMHO that the nonprofit constituency is
> > not "Real" in the sense that it's members are real nonprofit corps.,
> > but than again if you check with the IRS you will fine that neither
> > is ICANN a real nonprofit corp. either.
> >
> > kidsearch wrote:
> >
> > > Good luck Danny.
> > >
> > > Maybe ICANN could charge for membership in the At Large. They do seem to
> pay
> > > attention to those that can make them money.
> > >
> > > I'd like to see real representation of the nonprofit sector as well.
> > >
> > > Chris McElroy, President,
> > > Kidsearch Network
> > > http://www.KidsearchNetwork.org
> > > http://www.MissingChildrenBlog.com
> > > http://www.RunawayTeens.org
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: <vint@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 8:44 AM
> > > Subject: [ga] RE: Bylaws Change Requested -- The At-Large Requires
> > > Representation
> > >
> > > > 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/
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > "Obedience 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
> >
> >
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience 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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|