Re: [atlarge-discuss] role of voting

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Richard and all stakeholders of interested parties,

  I don't give a dam if Thomas is Partisan or not.  These and this list
should be under separate management regardless.  Again I would
suggest xlists.com or the ICANNATLARGE.COM to install
majordomo and host this list themselves...

Richard Henderson wrote:

> I repeat the anxieties I have previously expressed, as to whether Thomas
> is the right person to administer our lists, when he seems to me to have
> shown
> partisanship and a certain degree of obstructive behaviour over the GA
> motion
> on the re-bid. I'm not saying he isn't a person of principle (I've received
> some
> warm affirmations of him as a person) but he seems to me to be out of
> sympathy with the majority view of people at the GA, and I just don't see
> him as sufficiently hostile to ICANN's establishment. He doesn't want a
> re-bid. He didn't really want the motion to go ahead at all. I honestly feel
> that (taking personalities out of it) we would be better to "distance"
> ourselves
> from ICANN. The Denise Michel initiative is a similar danger area : we
> should
> make efforts to set "clear water" between our organisation and those persons
> or processes who seek to accommodate ICANN and keep it in power.
>
> ICANN is discredited. Its leadership cannot be trusted. Our organisation
> should focus instead on building a public membership so large and
> representative
> that it has a far greater voice (and mailing-lists!) of its own - and calls
> the
> agenda, instead of reacting to ICANN's.
>
> In all this, no offence is intended to Thomas. Rather, the expression of a
> point
> of view with which (no doubt) he may disagree. I do not impugn his
> character,
> and I'm happy to believe the best in him, on the recommendations I've
> received.
>
> It's not personal. It's the issue of independence and creating distance from
> the
> organisation which would like to subvert and engulf us.
>
> Richard
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: James Love <james.love@cptech.org>
> To: atlarge discuss list <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 4:14 PM
> Subject: [atlarge-discuss] role of voting
>
> > On the GA list there is an often bitter debate over whether or not we can
> > vote on particular measures, and if we pass those measures, are the votes
> > important or unimportant, and what makes a particular vote "important.",
> or
> > does encouraging participation mean one is "ballot stuffing" and on and
> on.
> > I would ask Thomas R, who is quite opinionated on these issues in his web
> > log and on the GA list, what his views of this are for the at large.
> >
> >   Jamie
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders 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