[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[atlarge-discuss] Re: [ALSC-Forum] icannatlarge.com security issue

Danny, sotiris and all stakeholders or interested parties,

DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> Hello Sotiris,
> Thank you for the invitation to rejoin icannatlarge.com.  You'll pardon me if
> I don't accept at this time -- I won't join any group that cares so little
> for the At-Large that its members won't even put up a structural proposal
> regarding the At-Large for the ICANN Board to consider.  Frankly, it reminds
> me a lot of the IDNO, whose members never once have done anything on behalf
> of the registrants they ostensibly represent, prefering instead to spend all
> their time either voting for leadership positions within the organization,
> claiming that they're planning on engaging in outreach, or on a never-ending
> discussion of the Charter and ByLaws.
> Yes, I've read the papers by members such as Vittorio, Izumi, Jamie, Rob and
> others.  Great comments, but where's the proposed structure?  How are
> At-large directors to be selected?  How many should there be?  Should there
> be regional At-Large Councils?  Should there be a central At-Large Policy
> Council?  Do all At-Large organizations get equal votes?  Do groups like ISOC
> and CECUA get one vote, or one vote per chapter?  What dues will
> organizational members pay?  What dues will individuals pay?  Will a large
> organization have the same number of votes as a tiny organization?  How will
> the At-Large Structure interact with the Supporting Organizations or Policy
> Councils?  On what timetable will all this happen?

  Yes these are all questions that need to be addressed and in short order
if ICANNATLARGE.COM is to be successful and be representative
of stakeholders/users on a globally recognized scale in a proposal format
that the ICANN BoD will or can except.  Even at that, I think it is doubtful
given the see-saw display from Stuart Lynn and some members of the ICANN
BoD that any such proposal would get the nod as At-Large representation.
But none the less, Danny is right here and these questions must be answered
in terms of a structured proposal to the ICANN BoD if any chance is to
be forthcoming...

> If no one makes a proposal, do you think that ICANN (out of the goodness of
> their heart) will create an At-Large in a pretty package all tied up in an
> elegant bow for you?  Think again.  If you don't fight for the At-large now,
> there won't be an At-Large later...
> Your "Interim Panel" has all its priorities screwed up.  What good is
> outreach and an ongoing debate on bylaws if there isn't any At-Large
> structure within ICANN?  Who gives a damn whether you meet the arbitrary goal
> of a thousand members if there's nothing left to fight for because its
> already been structurally eliminated?  Where is the At-Large in the Lynn
> Plan?  It ain't there buddy.  And it ain't gonna be there if you don't start
> doing something about it now.
> Esther and her minions have played all of you.  Instead of attacking the Lynn
> Plan and offering reasonable alternatives to protect the At-Large, she's
> suckered you into playing at building democratic institutions, and you're all
> as happy as turkeys on the day before Thanksgiving.   For a lousy thousand
> dollar investment in a website she has diverted all the attention away from
> the coming demise of the At-Large and has effectively manipulated all of you.
> Go ahead and enjoy being an At-Large "mechanism".  At this rate, it's all
> that you will ever have.

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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