[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Is This The Party To Whom I Am Speaking...
Richard and all fellow members,
Your comments and remarks regarding Joops Poll results in disbanding
the previous "Panel" are essentially correct, Richard. However Bruce
in particular does not recognize such. It would seem that Eric and Jefsey
do not either or they would not have acted as they have thus far in the
aftermath of that Poll.
I also agree that going down the path of illegitimacy and disregard
for the members will, is a road that ICANN did take long ago now,
and has lead in many ways to their growing public/stakeholder/user
distrust and disregard. We as an organization can HELP correct
that path should we be collectively dedicated strongly to doing
so. However it seems that again, the Jefsey-election has mislead
the membership and in doing so mirrored in many ways what ICANN
Richard Henderson wrote:
> The clear and simple fact is that Joop's first Poll (at the time when
> Vittorio was leaning our organisation towards ALAC and the RALOs and the
> Panel was threatening to take us where we did not wish to go) attracted more
> votes than the preceding election for the panel had attracted. That it is a
> simple historical fact.
> That Poll - which was distributed not to a minority but to almost the entire
> membership - had therefore as strong a mandate as any election of panelists.
> It was the People of this organisation speaking.
> It was far more reliable in its clear expression of members' wishes than the
> renegade panel which was failing to get quorums, which was drifting towards
> ALAC and which basically was not operating in a way which set us on the
> course we needed to go.
> I totally accept that this mechanism needs support, safeguards, a formal
> constitutional role. But the fact remains that it can't be marginalised as
> glibly as some people have tried to marginalise it.
> It has already been a strong expression of our democratic will. It can
> become a stronger expression still. I repeat: more people participated in
> that Poll than in the election. It was not some small clique at all. It was
> a strong expression of the People. And the People said they wanted the Poll,
> regularly, and they wanted to use it. (They also showed huge mistrust for
> ALAC, for ICANN, for the RALOs.)
> ICANN would prefer everything to be contained within panels and committees
> and delegates. But the grassroots views are far stronger than these
> delegates... far more critical of ICANN... and the grassroots are right to
> be sceptical... it is right that power and decision-making for the At Large
> is rooted right down there at the bottom... the minute you lose sight of
> that, you are on the road to ICANN-LAND.
> Richard Henderson
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jeff Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: <email@example.com>
> Cc: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 7:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Is This The Party To Whom I Am Speaking...
> > Bruce and all fellow members,
> > No bruce look it up again. Richard already posted the results
> > as have myself and Walter several times. The percentage was
> > 14% I believe.
> > email@example.com wrote:
> > > Jeff Williams wrote:
> > >
> > > | This is true Bruce, but does not and did not apply any longer
> > > | or further when the Panel was devolved or otherwise done
> > > | away with via the poll that Joop took and a representative sample
> > > | of the members voted in favor to remove that Panel in favor of
> > > | a new panel.
> > >
> > > Joop's poll engaged less than 10% of the membership, was conducted
> > > the official auspices of this organization without prior coordination,
> > > conducted without oversight, used questions that were heavily weighted
> > > Joop's way of thinking and not reviewed by anyone prior to asking them.
> > > Further, the poll was not announced to the membership as a whole in
> > > so that all members had the option to participate! As a result, the
> > > members participating were those who were already gravitating to his
> > > anyway. That is like polling the preacher and the choir during choir
> > > practice, then saying that this poll indicates the will of the whole
> > > congregation! It was a flawed sample.
> > >
> > > Currently, the only method of determining the will of the membership is
> > > ask them. That is what we are doing. God forbid we ever allow a
> > > so-called "representative sample" chosen in this manner to be used to
> > > policy for this organization!
> > >
> > > Bruce Young
> > > Portland, Oregon USA
> > > firstname.lastname@example.org
> > > http://www.barelyadequate.info
> > > --------------------------------------------
> > > Support democratic control of the Internet!
> > > Go to http://www.icannatlarge.org and Join ICANN At Large!
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
> > Pierre Abelard
> > ================================================================
> > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail email@example.com
> > Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com