Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: WG-DNS name protection

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

http://www.worldatlarge.org/index.php

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

Hans Klein wrote:

> Sotiris,
>
> If you have a mock-up web site, I am sure we would all be eager to see it.
>
> Can you post the URL?
>
> Hans
>
> At 02:15 PM 10/16/2002 -0400, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> >DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
> >
> > > Jamie,
> > >
> > > Before you begin questioning the relationship between established user
> > > organizations and ICANN, you might want to ask if your own group,
> > without any
> > > organizational documents, without even a mission statement, bylaws or
> > > charter, even qualifies as an organization suitable for recognition as an
> > > at-large structure.
> >
> >Perhaps a dis-organization, then?  Especially of late.
> >
> >Before I received this email from Danny, I was about to post a link to the
> >list
> >directing all of you to a mock-up web site which Hans requested I put together
> >(even though I had ALREADY set up the PHPNuke site for all of you to view a
> >couple months ago!  Remember that ladies and gentlemen?!?  Check the
> >archives, if
> >you like...).  However, having read Danny's email I stopped myself and
> >decided to
> >visit the Panel's closed list archive for a look at how our leaders are going
> >about the business of this "organization".  Much to my surprise, I saw a
> >motion
> >from Jamie Love (seconded by Hans Klein) to make Brett Faussett the new
> >webmaster.  No offense against Brett, but where's he been for the last couple
> >months? I didn't hear him volunteering his services when a new webmaster was
> >being sought.  Or, ( as is probably the case) is this some kind of a
> >compromise
> >selection to placate Joop?  In any case, if this is the direction the Panel
> >wishes to take, then I wish them all the power in the world.  However, I
> >cannot
> >for a moment understand why the WG-Web members (of which I am one) were not
> >consulted?
> >
> > > As per the Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform's Second Interim
> > > Implementation Report:  "We agree that individual at large entities should
> > > meet some "accreditation" standard, and we find the criteria and standards
> > > recommended by the Assistance Group to be an attractive list."
> > >
> > > This "list" stipulates structured, self-sustaining entities that engage in
> > > outreach and post current information about the organization's aims,
> > > structure, constituents, working mechanisms, and current leadership.
> > >
> > > 1.  Your aims are not posted
> >
> >To date I submitted TWO different versions of Mission Statements for this
> >organization (both several months ago) which elicited next to no comments, and
> >yet there is still no substantive work produced by the 'power elite' among
> >us on
> >this issue.  Shameful.  This and the webmaster issue noted above are enough to
> >put off persons (such as myself) who are willing to contribute
> >substantively...
> >
> > >
> > > 2.  You have no organizational structure
> >
> >Oh, but we do... dis-organization.
> >
> > >
> > > 3.  You are not self-sustaining
> >
> >If bombast and self-important bluster were the fuel of the day, I'd say we're
> >self-perpetuating rather than self-sustaining.
> >
> > >
> > > 4.  You have no established working mechanisms or procedures for the
> > general
> > > membership
> >
> >Why bother, that would detract from the nominal importance of our Panel
> >Members...  BTW, Danny, have you perhaps heard anything from that champion
> >of the
> >common netizens, Satyajit Gupta?  I wonder if the other Panel Members
> >approve of
> >his delinquency?  If not, then why are there no steps being taken to
> >replace him?
> >
> > >
> > > 5.  You can't document any organizational outreach activities
> >
> >Well, you might have something there.  Perhaps Richard Henderson can fill
> >us in
> >on the progress towards the 100, 000 membership base he promised.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > After you get your own house in order, then feel free to question the
> > > relationship of ISOC chapters to ICANN -- they at least meet the minimum
> > > criteria expected for an at-large structure.
> >
> >Except for the fact that they are now a Registry operator, which puts them
> >in the
> >gTLD constituency...
> >
> >Seriously Disappointed,
> >
> >Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> >For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de