[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [atlarge-discuss] Our Task List and Status...



At 22:58 +0000 2002/12/29, Richard Henderson wrote:
>[snip]
>Our mission statement and bylaws need to be developed IN THE CONTEXT
>of our
>relationship to the ICANN agenda and RALOs. If our organisation
>intends to
>help build up the ICANN Ralos, then it will need one set of statements
>and
>bylaws (and I will offer it little or no support and start mobilising
>other
>groups). If our organisation recognises its mission to lead the way to
>an
>external At Large with its own independent structures and agenda - an
>umbella coalition of internet users and groups OUTSIDE Icann's
>machinations - then it will need a different mission statement and
>bylaws
>which match its aims. In this second case, I would be ready to be
>actively
>involved.

Precisely, and I am in the same position as Richard -- there is no
point at all in my remaining part of this group if all it wants to
do is play the ICANN game, since I don't believe for a moment that
anything can be achieved that way or that those who want to play
it are interested in what the worldwide Internet user community
actually wants.

>I therefore renew my PROPOSAL for a ballot of all members, and invite a
>panel member to second this motion, so that we can establish clarity
>about
>what the membership REALLY sees as our mission.
>
>PROPOSAL:
>to poll our entire membership on whether they (A) want the group to
>help
>build up ICANN's Ralos and structures... or (B) want the group to form
>a
>coalition with its own structures OUTSIDE the Icann scheme, in clear
>opposition to the fake At Large that Icann is trying to develop as a
>public
>relations stunt.
>
>This wording and this choice is what I would like the membership to
>vote on.
>
>It is a clearcut choice. I do not believe personally that we can (or
>>should) do both.

I'm not a Panel member but have been distressed by the lack of action
on Richard's original call for a ballot. Without a clear mandate from
the membership as to which direction this group wants to pursue,
there is no way for the Panel or the WG-Bylaws to reach agreement
on what the incorporated organization should be or how it should
operate. If there are 1000+ registered members, then every one of
them -- not just those who post here or in a forum -- must be asked
what they want so as to determine the majority's preference. I find
it rather scandalous that our Panel seems reluctant to find out what
that is.

Unlike Richard, though, I think the question on the ballot might
be better phrased more neutrally. Perhaps if we are for some
reason reluctant to allow voting more than twice a year, this
ballot should include a clear choice among the various mission
statements proposed to date and another set of choices such as:

This organization should be an umbrella-group for
national and regional "At Large" constituencies
representing Internet users to ICANN and other
bodies but operating independently of such bodies. __ Yes  __ No

This organization should organize the Regional At
Large Organizations (RALOs) called for under ICANN's
new structure so as to work within the system      __ Yes  __ No

This organization should incorporate in the
United States as a 501C3 not-for-profit
organization so as to offer tax deductions to
potential U.S. donors.                             __ Yes  __ No

This organization should incorporate itself
as an international organization to represent
the interests of all Internet users, notwithstanding
possible ineligibility for tax-deductible charity
status of its mission.                             __ Yes  __ No

This organization should conduct a yearly election
for Board members who will then decide what the
organization will be and do without further input
from the membership.                               __ Yes  __ No

This organization should exist to carry out the
policy decisions made by its membership through
periodic electronic ballots; its Board should be
responsible for organizing such ballots as needed
and carrying out the policies so determined.       __ Yes  __ No

Representatives of this organization will be
appointed on an ad hoc basis by its Board.         __ Yes  __ No

Representatives of this organization will be
elected by a vote of the membership to serve a
set term or fulfil a specific mandate.             __ Yes  __ No


Since it appears that opportunities for members to have any input
in what is or isn't done will be few under the current system,
I think we need to learn as much as possible about what the
members actually do want by means of what may well be the only
ballot permitted before election time rolls around again.
In the absence of such a ballot, I see no future for this
group at all.

Sincerely,

Judyth


##########################################################
Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
##########################################################
"A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
"Un mot suffit aux sages; pour les autres, il en faut plus."
##########################################################



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