Re: [ga] Crossroads?

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dr. Dierker and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
stakeholders/users,

I cannot except, nor can any of our members as well it seems can many
other
stakeholders/users that ego alone, or the most significant of several
other
factors holding back individual representation in either a redesigned
GNSO/DNSO or the ALAC.  Indeed however of late we have seen/read
several posts to this and other fora regarding the ALAC in relation to
the Vancouver ICANN meeting and WSIS in Tunisia that would demonstrate
that there are some, such as Joop and the ill fated IDNO that are/were
mainly motivated my ego as a failing factor in their demise or non
recognition
as a representative NGO/non-profit acceptable to the ICANN BoD.  Such
a judgment at that time was correct, and would be correct now should the

IDNO be resurrected under the same or similar circumstances.

The problem as we see it is that the GNSO constituency model as well
as the structure/model set for the ALAC was also in part motivated by
ego but just as much motivated by management philosophy.  Such
overriding
motivations are not healthy as we are now again seeing, hearing, and
reading, for meeting the mandate of the MoU toDOC/NTIA to ICANN.

Hence, restructuring or redesigning the structure of the GNSO and the
ALAC is necessary so as to include individual's in a meaningful, active
and effecting way to formulate and determine policy.  The present
structure of the GNSO and the ALAC cannot and clearly does not
adequately provide for such.

Hugh Dierker wrote:

>   Jeff and Danny, et.al,
>
>   Boy Howdy! And Yippidity Do!  Reading all this malcontent regarding
> the ALAC and promotion of some group of real individual users has me
> all a quiver. It looks like we have now reached a crossroads. That
> something is finally going to be done about getting the group
> together. Sorry it ain't gonna happen again.
>
>   Egos are the first reason it will not happen, the active user group
> people involved have time and time again proven they cannot set their
> personal grandiose perspectives aside and that, in fact they are
> individuals and going a group takes away their autonomy. The second
> reason is the dotcommoner/domain name holder split. If someone is
> unaware; domain name holders who speak out here are really in the
> business. And they do not see someone who simply uses another
> entitities domain name or more simply just uses them as a consumer or
> researcher to surf the web is worthy of representation.
>
>   So the crossroads are upon us again and we can look to the
> participating "individuals" to watch and argue until they are well
> behind us again. ICANN does not have an individual group because they
> suppress it, they do not have one because the "individuals" are not
> sufficiently motivated to set aside petty differences and do something
> that will benefit another rather than themselves.
>
>   e
>
>

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