RE: [ga] [Fwd: [address-policy-wg] ICANN Ratifies Global Policy for Allocation of IPv6 Address Space]

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

--- "Michael D. Palage" <Michael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> As I tried to articulate earlier, all it takes is one over the top
> post
> to undermine a hundred otherwise valid comments. I tried to gently
> raise
> this issue in connection with a previous post by George where he
> talked
> about firing all the senior staff at the next Board retreat.

I recall writing the following:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg04504.html

"Instead of discussing this issue, ICANN's Board should spend the time
in its next Board meeting discussing which staff members need to be
fired for wasting resources renegotiating contracts that don't need to
be renegotiated, and showing poor judgement in thinking that the terms
they negotiated benefit the public in any way."

If ICANN's staff are to be accountable, they need to see repercussions
when they screw up. That's not unreasonable or "over the top" or
"undermining a hundred otherwise valid comments".

But, if one wanted to argue whether most of them deserve to be canned,
it would be an interesting debate. Maybe the GNSO council should make a
recommendation. I'd be for a smaller, parsimonious ICANN that has
people of excellence working for it. To date, with a few exceptions,
I've not seen many examples of "excellence" coming from the staff. I'd
appreciate knowing who you consider to be "excellent".

If ICANN could re-jig its Board member rules to get rid of Karl, who
voted in the right way on many important matters (e.g. no presumptive
renewal for .com), they can certainly weed out some of their own staff
who aren't up to par. 

Fire them all, and have them re-bid their own jobs!! :)  <--- that's a
smiley, for the humour-impaired, and those looking for something 'over
the top' to quote out of context someday

Sincerely,

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