Re: [ga] Getting Heard by the ICANN Board

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dr. Dierker, Vittorio, and all,

  If I recall, the last time this was attempted, the blog concerned was
massively
edited after the fact so no accurate historical record was kept.
Additionally
 we already have this GA forum in which if the ICANN Bod will actively
participate in good faith, they would have or be able to know where
stakeholders/registrants/users stand on issues and matters of policy
concerns.

Hugh Dierker wrote:

>    I do not believe there is a problem of bottom, consensus or up. The
> problem lies in stakeholder. If you define it only as a group or
> business or association like the at-large has done then ICANN is on
> the money. If you define stakeholder as including individuals
> individually then ICANN is an abject failure.
>   The GA has always been the closest mark to stakeholders as
> individuals. And now that it refuses to reorganize there is nothing at
> all. The funny thing about it is that I can find nothing to say it
> does not exist, yet everyone just accepts that it is defunct.
>
>   e
>
> kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>           Danny, once again an example of the fact that ICANN is bound
> to a bottom up consensus.
>
>     Accountability: ICANN shall continue to develop, test, maintain,
> and improve on accountability mechanisms to be responsive to global
> Internet stakeholders in the consideration and adoption of policies
> related to the technical coordination of the Internet DNS, including
> continuing to improve openness and accessibility for enhanced
> participation in ICANN's bottom-up participatory policy development
> processes.
>   I see ICANN does not intend to comply with #3 stated above. That or
> they wish to define the bottom as registries and registrars.
>   #6 once again enforces that process.
>   Multi-stakeholder Model: ICANN shall maintain and improve
> multi-stakeholder model and the global participation of all
> stakeholders, including conducting reviews of its existing advisory
> committees and supporting organizations, and will continue to further
> the effectiveness of the bottom-up policy development processes. ICANN
> will strive to increase engagement with the Private Sector by
> developing additional mechanisms for involvement of those affected by
> the ICANN policies.
>   I believe this to be why everyone involved refuses to define
> bottom-up consensus. A definition would mean they would have to adhere
> to it. No definition means they have no real accountability.
>   Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
>   http://www.articlecontentprovider.com
>
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Hugh Dierker
>   To: Dominik Filipp ; GA
>   Cc: Bret Fausett ; Vittorio Bertola
>   Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:17 PM
>   Subject: RE: [ga] Getting Heard by the ICANN Board
>
>
>   We live in a time when quick fixes or one size fits alls are our
> expectations. Well things really worthwhile are not such things
>  __________________________________________________

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