[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ICANN-EU] Re: Controversial [was: Revised version of "Things to Ask for at MDR"]
- To: Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>
- Subject: [ICANN-EU] Re: Controversial [was: Revised version of "Things to Ask for at MDR"]
- From: "Jeanette Hofmann" <jeanette@medea.wz-berlin.de>
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 02:24:57 +0100
- CC: icann-europe@fitug.de
- Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
- In-reply-to: <200011092334.MAA18053@fep3-orange.clear.net.nz>
- Organization: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin
- References: <20001109123238.N20567@sobolev.does-not-exist.org>
- Sender: owner-icann-europe@fitug.de
O
> Dear Thomas,
>
> I think the list is a good beginning, but I am somewhat concerned about
> asking them to postpone "controversial decisions" , without defining or
> enumerating them.
How could we enumerate controversial decisions yet to come?
Unless we go for a complete list of potential topics, I don't see how this could
be done. In that case, it would be more straight forward though to propose a
motion that would prohibit any decisions to be made by an incomplete board. I
don't think this would be a good idea.
>
> They will interpret the request in the way to suit them best.
> Is is decision controversial, just because Crocker, Crispin and Stubbs are
> vehemently opposed?
> Is a decision controversial when the GA votes 68 FOR, against 3, but the
> Board itself is evenly divided on it? (the IDNO admission into the DNSO)
Yes.
jeanette
>
> So far, postponing has been the Board's policy, (Berlin, Santiago, Cairo
> and Yokohama) in the hope that such issues of democracy deficit would go
> away and the proponents would run out of steam for sheer lack of funding.
>
> On these issues the decisions should be made, rather than postponed again.
>
> --Joop Teernstra LL.M.--
> the Cyberspace Association and
> the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
> Elected representative.
> http://www.idno.org
>