RE: [ga] Funding denied

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Roberto,

Almost from day one, the GA has been part of the ICANN
landscape.  We consider ourselves to be a part of
ICANN just as much as any other group with a similar
record of continuous involvement.  

For you to take the position that we are merely a
"mailing list of individuals that have an interest in
internet matters" and that we are a group "outside the
ICANN structure" is disingenuous at best.

We are a group whose representative structure was
eliminated by ICANN during the same "reform" that saw
the elimination of all at-large directors.  We are a
group that has been victimized by the Board, and you
know it.

I'm surprised that you have so quickly adopted the
party line.  I thought that you had more backbone than
that.

regards,
Danny




--- Roberto Gaetano <roberto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  
> Danny,
> 
> > 
> > To which region should the GA apply for regional
> status???  
> > Or do you consider it wise to bust up the GA into
> five 
> > regions just to meet the rather foolish ALAC
> criteria that 
> > demands that a group be regional?
> 
> The structure in Regions is not meant to be an
> obstacle, but rather a step
> to allow organizing locally, as well as the
> recognition of the fact that
> different regions might have different priorities.
> As such, I don't believe
> that it will be a problem to accept the application
> of an organization that,
> as the GA, does not have a place of incorporation,
> and has members spanning
> over different regions.
> In this respect, my suggestion would be to apply in
> the region where the
> relative majority of the members reside, which is
> likely to be North
> America. Another option would be Europe, that I
> believe also has wide
> representation (although I don't know the exact
> numbers) and is where the
> GNSO Secretariat (who manages the list) resides.
> 
> > 
> > Why not simply do the right thing and properly
> fund the GA?
> 
> Because ICANN does not have an approprite mechanism
> for funding initiatives
> and groups outside the ICANN structure. While ALAC
> is part of ICANN, as are
> the Supporting Organizations, the Committees, etc.,
> the GA does not have
> this status. From ICANN's point of view, it is a
> mailing list of individuals
> that have an interest in internet matters. However,
> there might be many of
> these lists and/or groups worldwide, and if some
> funding is granted to the
> GA ICANN might face the problem of having several
> requests for funding from
> other groups, and the whole thing might rapidly get
> out of hand. Be advised
> that this is my own opinion, and I don't know what
> would be the official
> answer of the General Counsel or of the Board.
> 
> Maybe the best way to deal with this matter, since
> Joop has already
> volounteered to put in place an infrastructure,
> would be to poll the GA
> membership whether they feel that the GA should or
> not apply as an AtLarge
> structure.
> 
> I am no longer an ALAC member, but I am sure that
> there are other ALAC
> members that can pick up the issue and follow it up
> if the GA so wishes.
> 
> Cheers,
> Roberto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Now that's room service!  Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097