Re: [ICANN-EU] ICANN MEMBERS' FORUM: Los Angeles, Nov. 12

[Hans Klein <hans.klein@pubpolicy.gatech.edu>]

Dear ICANN-Europe subscribers,

Sorry to not be very active in this discussion.

The "leader" phrase was not a good choice of words.  It is partly cultural,
but also partly carelessness on my part.  I apologize.

The program for the Members Forum in Los Angeles is organized by region.
There is a time slot for a European presentation.

What goes in that time slot is not defined.  It is for the members of the
region to decide.

I hope that the European members of the program committee can work with
European members generally to decide what to say at the Members Forum.

Sincerely,
Hans Klein









At 10:01 PM 10/21/00 +0200, jeanette@medea.wz-berlin.de wrote:
>
>
>> Roberto,
>> 
>> On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>> 
>> > Marc,
>> > >
>> > >Am I in a bad mood, or does this sound very ICANNesk: "recognized
>> > >leaders", claiming recognition by "anonymous individuals" (half of
>> > >whom never fully immatriculated as member, and of whom they will
>> > >hardly know even 1%) are going to "create" something "enduring", to
>> > >wit a "self-organization"?
>
>This "recognized leader" phrase put me off too. Could this be a 
>matter of different cultural backgrounds? In any event, to me it 
>seems inappropriate.
>While I concede that some form of  "boot-strapping" seems to be 
>necessary if we want the ALM to get anywhere, we should be very 
>careful to avoid the intransparency that we've criticized with regard 
>to ICANN's board. 
>
>> > >Can those who have no PIN also attend, provided they can afford to fly
>> > >to California? How do you tell who is a member and who not?
>> > >
>> > >Truly an ICANNesk bottom-up process of concensus. Keep the tradition
>> > >going.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > FYI, Hans is one of the people who is trying to help in building a
bottom-up 
>> > process. That's why he is organizing this fully open meeting.
>
>True, and he deserves all the credit for that. However, the way the 
>program committee has been put together isn't exactly what one 
>would call bottom-up, is it?
>
>
>> Yes, I understood that much :-) Received the message 6 or 7 times, so
>> it must get across.
>> 
>> > BTW, there's nothing wrong in using ICANNesk language at ICANN
meetings ;>)
>> 
>> I am not sure I agree about that.
>
>I am quite sure that I don't agree. ICANNesk language is a lawyers' 
>language full of palliations and doubtful pretences. I don't want to 
>play this game, not even language-wise.  
>
> I am sure I begin to dislike more
>> and more claims of concensus and suggestions of representing people
>> who are invisible and can neither endorse nor disclaim those claims
>> and suggestions. 
>
>
>> -- 
>> Marc Schneiders
>> 
>> "In re tam iusta nulla est deliberatio."
>> (Acta SS. Mart. Scillitanorum [AD 202]) 
>> 
>
>
>
>