RE: [atlarge-discuss] Impersonal processes Re: [Fwd: [atlarge-discuss] WHAT MOSTMEMBERS WANT]

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Agreed, but abiding by statements and making true on comitments is 
probably just as important.  These folks garnering votes in order to be 
appointed to ICANN groups is disgusting.  Yes I stand by the idea of 
bending to the will of the people, but that is mighty different than 
having a preset agenda to abandon them.

e


> Richard Henderson wrote:
> 
> |  In order for that to happen, there has to be definition of the
> |  specific work
> |  we want achieved - and I really believe that definition can only | 
> be arrived
> |  at by the sanction (and participation) of the broad membership.
> 
> I totally agree.  That was the my motivation to request questions from
> the mem,bership that we can include on the ballot.  That way we not
> only get a new panel, but we also get an idea of the will of the
> membership that they can use to focus their actions.
> 
> |  So I advocate: elections (with a built in accountability to the | 
> membership) --- polling to define needs and objectives --- then |  the
> priority
> |  of carrying out those objectives, preferably tied down to agreed
> time |  limits.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> Bruce Young
> Portland, Oregon USA
> bruce@barelyadequate.info
> http://www.barelyadequate.info
> --------------------------------------------
> Support democratic control of the Internet!
> Go to http://www.icannatlarge.org and Join ICANN At Large!
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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