Re: [atlarge-discuss] Short-term goals

["J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>]

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outdated confrontation environment.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