Re: [ga] significant user representation

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

--- kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thomas do you not believe that is a two-way street? After all these
> years of
> the board and constituencies not listening, not doing anything that
> resembles a bottom up consensus nor anything resembling transparency,
> don't
> you think people get a little suspicious of motives and a little
> frustrated?
> Do you think we are frustrated with this whole process for no reason?
> We
> volunteers our time to get involved and the board and others treat
> this list
> like its garbage. How does that encourage others to speak up or get
> involved?

Furthermore, this is the GA list, which is a cross-constituency list by
its very nature -- that will lead to conflict. This isn't the Registry
Constituency list, where a group of oligopolists are having polite tea
parties, deciding how to split the market between themselves.

The only other major cross-constituency list is the GNSO Council list.
I've listened to some of the recordings of conference calls, and I've
heard vigorous and occasionally sharp dialogue there too. That happens
when folks are passionate about their viewpoints. They're occasionally
more diplomatic, but one can hear their frustrations too, and how that
leads them to forcefully make their positions heard.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/