Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] My two cents...

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

YJ and all,

  How could your notion that something you call "ICANN WSIS"
is a legitimate ATLARGE of any realistic sort? Please advise
in detail...

"WSIS" is a business technical sector at best, and within
ICANN's structure would only fit into the BC or form it's
own Constituency...

  This said and rightly outlines, it is true that the USERS or
Wireless internet, could be considered ATLARGE members
and therefore would belong into an ATLARGE structure.
However that gaming of ATLARGE's as Esther Dyson has
been trying to hoist or inject into the Body Politic in an effort to
sell a concept that fragments ( Read divide and conquer ) of
useful and meaningful ATLARGE stakeholder/user participation
in policy making...

  That is a ruse that I hope members here will not be foolish
enough to fall into...

YJ Park wrote:

> > > Dear all,
> > > 3. Future Action Items
> > >
> > > 3.1. To continue as it is preparing our 2nd panel election
> > >
> > > Despite piled complaints, we should keep going on if this
> > > group really wants to move forward and prepare for the 2nd
> > > election hoping they can work better than the first panelists.
> >
> > *****RH: The majority of our members do not want us to "continue preparing
> > our 2nd elections" (in August). They want us to GO! NOW! We should respect
> > that wish. We are only here to do their wishes*****
>
> I agree in line with this thought.
>
> > > 3.3. To participate in the ICANN process as At-Large group
> > >
> > > As some of us have done, we still have to be inside ICANN
> > > as part of At-Large structure to be heard and reflected in the
> > > decision-making process.
> >
> > *****RH: I understand that view, but how do you reconcile it with the
> > majority view of our members that the ICANN at large structure cannot be
> > trusted (over 90% view) and that we should follow an alternative structure
> > OUTSIDE Icann? It's a problem YJ, because does the Panel represent itself,
> > or do we represent our members?*****
>
> History evolves....
> The concept of country has been evolved from family to city to nation....
>
> The concept of At-Large may/should be evolved, too.
>
> We are dreaming of "one unified global at-large" in the cyberspce
> as of today which can be the destination of At-Large history in the
> long run.
>
> Due to realistic limits, we should start to build many small At-Large
> structure here and there first. We are about to establish the concept
> itself in reality fighting aginst those who deny such a concept itself.
>
> ICANNatlarge in ICANN is one of them.
> ICANNatlarge in WSIS is one of them
> Maybe we can participate in others as long as we can strengthen
> the concept of "at-large" itself and make it survive.
>
> My two cents....
>
> Sincerely,
> YJ
>
> > > Sincerely,
> > > YJ
> >
> >

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801



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