Re: [ga] Crossroads?/The Great Giveme Society

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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

I nor any of our members said or believe that the USG owes us or any
other stakeholder/user anything. Where did you read such a thing?  How
could anyone extract from my remarks below even remotely indicate
such, prey tell?

As the USG/ICANN is a servant to the public and serves at the benefit
and at the discretion of the public, and to the extent that the Internet
is
a public resource paid for initially to a great degree by tax dollars,
there is to THIS extent a responsibility to the public in which ICANN
and the USG serves, a implied and direct responsibility to
stakeholders/user i.e. consumers, both domestic and elsewhere.

Hugh Dierker wrote:

>    Jeff, et al,
>
>   Then you and any/all of your members are wrong. ICANN and the USAGov
> does not owe you a thing. From Marx to Jefferson to Ho Chi Minh to
> Plato to Napaleon they all recognized that a people willing to
> subjugate themselve because life was just too comfortable the way it
> is - will never be free. All these horrible claims of cyber torture
> and atrocities committed by governing bodies of the net are mere
> nuisances. Of those who would speak out not one is willing to rally
> behind a cause good for all at the loss of a particular good to him
> alone.
>
>   Corporations are allowed to change their bylaws and articles of
> incorporation. Ridding themselves of pesky
> "stakeholders/members/stockholders. Corporations may resolve
> litigation by agreeing to change contract terms. Corporations may hold
> funny junckets in foreign exotic places where saleswomen can dance
> with lampshades on their head.
>
>   The bitching and moaning from even such luminaries as Karl and
> Michael reminds us that even the most brilliant minds may be held
> captive by that illusive action of "not acting". Note however merely
> by example they are both comfortable and careful not to displace the
> devil they know with the one they don't. I have never seen such men
> support another or a group of others, who are radical against
> submission of the dotcommoner. Could this be EGO?
>
>   I see no woman who has lost her life work here or has been forced
> into homelessness due to actions of ICANN. In fact quite the opposite,
> including survivors of the dotBOMB created by Gore and Clinton.
>
>   No, Jeff we are not even dealing with self preservation here but
> rather pure unadulterated self interest.
>
>   e
>
> Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   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
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>  Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less
>

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