Re: [atlarge-discuss] Fw: Resignation

[Norbert Klein <nhklein@gmx.net>]

> Dear Vittorio,
> 
> as a former panel member, who has followed the discussion and was rather
> silent the the last weeks, I would support a quick and simple procedure to
> ask the 1000+ registered icanatlarge.com/.org members, whether they have
> joined the emerging organisation to work within or outside ICANN. Time is
> more than ripe to make a clear distinction. As far as I see the process
> there will be unavoidable a split: there are a number of
> people/unsers/members who want to work within ICANN and the emerging
> RALOs.

Dear Vittorio,

I want to join with Wolfgang and others in the suggestion to come to a vote
which opens two clear alternatives. But I have still difficulties with the
wording which would be most appropriate for such a vote.

Wolfgang says: "whether they have joined the emerging organisation to work
within or outside ICANN" - but that was not an issue when the majority of the
people joined: not "within" or "outside," but in order to maintain an
important element in ICANN: the At-Large-Membership, which was in danger to be
pushed aside - and all know what happened since.

I have been silent for a long time because I never could understand what an
At-Large organizatikon would be which would not work TOWARDS IMPROVING THE
ORGANIZATION HANDLING ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS, and a lot of other things
which are handled, at present, by ICANN.

Maybe I did not read well what was said, but I never got a clear
understanding what those of the present membership who want to work not only "outside"
of ICANN but who want to work for a kind of world body doing the task ICANN is
doing (for better or for worse) really envision to do, and to achieve.

So I got the impression that the alternative for the question in the ballot
would be something like:

"to continue to work for the democratic control of ICANN"

or 

"to create an independent world wide organizations of Internet users so that
they can raise their common concerns through this new organization." 

I don't think the alternative is "under" ICANN or not - but whether the work
is aiming at ICANN or not. I do not see - for me - much value at this point
of time in not focussing on ICANN. What ICANN decises, has quite an impact on
all of us communicating, and I think there is a lot to fight out on this
field.

I have been busy - in addition to my normal day-to-day work - in
Asia-Pacific wide concens in the NGO and civil society worlds about the preparatory
process for the World Summit on the Information Society, and I now got also a
fellowship support to participate in the Tokyo meetings, for the NGO part
starting on the 11th, and for the joint governments - private sector - civil
society conference from 13 to 15th.

Also here it is obvious that it is so difficult for some government
participants to accept the full participation of civil society (which was envisaged
in the original UN General Assembly decisions).  Again some asked: should we
rather walk out? A large number of NGOs in Asia have instead tried to
elaborate our conccerns, to write them down, and to try to get them into the
discussions at Tokyo.

Thanks for all who have volunteered to put time and energy into the At-Large
development, and through the present struggle.

Greetings,


Norbert

-- 
Norbert Klein
Open Forum of Cambodia
Phnom Penh/Cambodia


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