[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Short-term goals
On 14:26 28/09/02, NameCritic said:
Since the bylaws define our purpose and the structure under which we will
operate, this should be the #1 priority for us or for the panel. Is there
already a panel or committee working on it?
Not necessarily a #1 priority. I think #1 priority is to live together and
see how it works, so not to commit yet to final structures. This is the
first time ever that a significant number of people not knowing each other,
from every part of the earth, from every cultures, attempt to create some
organization together on a peer to peer basis, in a still top-own/bottom-up
outdated confrontation environment.
I feel the first thing to do is to avoid to speak of specific forms,
country, etc. for the global organization. What we can certainly do - and
this is what we did with the Panel - is to agree upon a common Secretariat
structure: we live in a real world.
We have several attempted experiences to take advantage from. IDNO tried
and though about Tonga or other small non committing States. TLDA tried and
went the US way, what turned to be very slow and a poor current situation.
USG tried another way with ICANN and California. Not a success. What I see
is that there are four stable experiences: (a) NGO and International
status, not our cup of tea right now (b) European associations (Belgium,
France, Luxembourg) for light non-profit (c) Switzerland, some
Central-America and off-shore Trusts for businesses and large non-profit
(d) canonic law of the Roman Church, not our cup of tea but a lof of
experience in supported diversity, globality and duration...a keyworkd I
always remembered, they have no "chair" (only the Pope): they have
"moderators", what someone translated very well at the DNSO WG-Review as
"stewart" - showing that Scotts are level with Romans in terms of
organizing networks.
IMHO this incorporation is not a big deal: I have incorporated several
organizations in France I manage quite alone under the control of friendly
coopted BoDs (world@wide foundation, SIAT created in 1978 which supported
most of the public international network documentations and international
users at a time). The real thing is a name, a banking account, a financial
control (ie at least three Treasurers and a public reporting) and a BoD
motion system. Our organization is like a political party: we will never -
and we do not want - prevent anyone from doing what he wants. Any
organization with a "Chair" will fail. What we need is a catalysis, we may
accept Moderators/Stewarts. This is to be provided by the Panel. All the
Panel needs is a Secretariat.
So I propose this very simple approach:
1. a Panel
2. an incoporated Secretariat wearing the name of "icannatlarge" (in the
meaning if ICANN Users Association) Secretariat and the "secretariat@large"
logo.
3. the Secretariat being a Panel's Working Group in charge of the banking
account reporting in common. The Chair of that Secretariat-WG being the
legal Chair of the formal ad-hoc legal secretariat structure. That kind of
organization may be complex under most of the legislations, not under the
French one (the law is 101 years old, very stable and simple, there are
nearly one million of such associations, cost is $25, there is no problem
in enforcing any by-laws in any language).
The interest of this approach is that we are completely free of deciding
the by-laws we want, we can have as many different actions without beaking
our unity, we can change easily - yet having a stable secretariat (ex. my
own SIAT experience which is 24 years old). We will never create a formal
organization, all the more if we target 100.000s. We will create an
externet (virtual community network) supported culture. The recent
experience of Joanna just trying to formalize a few things shown that even
light formalization does not work, in spite of dedication and everyone's
good will.
As I explained I think the best is to have a network unity through the
naming "@large" and then to leave people free to start what ever they want,
to advertize it and see how it develops (and dies without affecting the
other initiatives), while keeping everyone informed. I think the
icannatlarge.org site as Sotiris plans it will help.
If every PHP developpers want to help we agree with Sotiris there is a good
French (but undortunately still only in French) system which could be
matched with PostNuke and lead to an international organization management
system. We do not want to dispute over institutions, we want to use tools
to achieve things together. As Leissigs says "the Internet constitution is
in the source code". We have a site, we have a DNS. Let add the rest in
their source code it will be more stable than disputed by-laws.
So I call on everyone knowing about sites and PHPs (Sotiris, Chirs,
Vittorio) technics to join the WEG-WG with Vittorio, Gary, Sotiris; and
everyone knowing about DNS to join the DNS-WG with me. So we can build and
provide a good technical structure, supporting the organizations
expectations and we will most probably see soon that it supports
well Richard's effort for outreach.
The Panel was given one year. We tried it the "normal" standard way. Joanna
tried the "Best Practices" they theorically worked very hard on. It shown
that real international network life is different. I suggest we build on
that experience. The first lesson being that we can be wrong again, that we
have not to be ashamed of it nor to feel hurt.
I am glad Joanna stopped her experience, I am sad she left and I do not
really understand. The experiment turned wrong, Joanna was right to try it
and we all need to fully understand why it was wrong: who better than
Joanna knows and can report about it.
jfc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de