[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Bucharest on ICANN reform and NomCom
- To: atlarge discuss list <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
- Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Bucharest on ICANN reform and NomCom
- From: Izumi AIZU <izumi@anr.org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 03:53:25 +0900
- Delivered-To: mailing list atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
- In-Reply-To: <3D188F09.5000506@cptech.org>
- List-Help: <mailto:atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de>
- List-Post: <mailto:atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
- List-Subscribe: <mailto:atlarge-discuss-subscribe@lists.fitug.de>
- List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de>
- Mailing-List: contact atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de; run by ezmlm
- References: <5.0.0.25.2.20020625110507.02ca7a70@63.126.41.85>
I was there with Jamie, Ester, Denis and some others.
I am sorry to say, but Jamie is quoting or picking up the portion of the
lengthy discussion
he thinks to fit, but editing the rest out.
I was puzzled, why he is only accusing the wrong target but not trying to build
trust as a start point. It was the first face-to-face meeting of
icannatlarge.com,
and he just resigned from one of th 7 members of panel because he thought
the rest of the panel, especially the chair and alt-chair was ont doing enough
to make election happen within 90 days mandate. As the alt-chair, I accept
his criticism, but I also want to mention that he should stay to be responsible.
izumi
At 11:40 02/06/25 -0400, James Love wrote:
>Esther Dyson wrote:
>>the way you made it was not constructive.
>
> What was going on in the at large meeting was that Esther and Denis
> were giving us the "go with the Borg" pep talk. It isn't constructive
> to disagree with they fundamental positions in the "blueprint" documents.
> "Constructive" contributions would be to working with the framework on
> the blueprint, and not object to the basic design.
>
> We also received a lecture from Esther about how democracy isn't
> considered a good thing in many parts of the world.
>
> I was asking if elections by the general public were in fact a taboo
> in the new ICANN blueprint.... seeing the GA "no vote" provision, and the
> way ICANN was created a "at large structures" that could apparently
> never vote on anything, I was asking, is ICANN deliberately creating a
> system where any expressions of popular are forbidden?
>
> Raising this issue, or even asking the question, is "not constructive."
>
> Jamie
>
>
>------
>James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
>http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love@cptech.org
>voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
>For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de