[ga] issues that are long closed?

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 11:52 a.m. 29/06/2007, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> On the same line of reasonment, maybe we could wonder whether there is a
> correlation between the fact that most of what goes on now in the GA is
> complaining or resuscitating issues that are long closed and the fact that
> the Board does not pay attention.

Dear Roberto,

Would you not acknowledge that the issue of Individuals' representation 
would have been "closed" unilaterally  and not by a process like 
Independent Review, that might indeed have brought closure.

Was it perhaps "closed" by a Board vote in 1999?
Or was it the ALSC report that brought "closure"?

As it is, it is this  open deficit that still disfigures ICANN and it will 
do so until it is adequately addressed.

The LSE report makes recommendations for GNSO improvement and now we are 
requested to comment on these and come with our own recommendations.

The fact that some on this list still care to do this, constructively and 
for ICANN's benefit, should be respected rather than discouraged with 
labels and   venom.

What I would prefer to see is a Board initiative, without a third petition.
Perhaps that idea could be brought to the Board's attention?

-joop-