Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] elections

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

Joanna and all stakeholders of interested parties,

  Your suggestions her Joanna are very good ones.  And again they
have been made a number of time in the past.  But remember
and understand this, whatever elections the ICANNATLARGE.COM
has now or in the near term, will NEVER be considered seriously
by the now ICANN BOD or staff...

Joanna Lane wrote:

> Given that time constraints preclude any messing around, I suggest a slight
> flexibility/redundancy is added to the election process in the form of the
> election of an organization that can, from the outset, accommodate a working
> structure for two separate and distinct functions - A). A Group to work
> inside the ICANN ALAC using top-down guidance from ICANN Board and Nom-Com
> appointees such as Denise Michele, and B) the other group, a separate and
> wholly external [to ICANN] lobbying group, whose very existence is not
> dependant upon ICANN Board's benevolence or lack of it thereof, which will
> be guided solely by a mandate derived from a bottom-up consensus development
> process, based on democratic principals of open working groups, elections
> and one man one vote.
>
> My thinking is this:-
>
> Today, we witnessed Jamie Love express very clearly and forcefully the very
> deep concerns of many individuals from the user community who could not
> attend in person and speak for themselves in the Public Forum at Bucharest.
> Such a position is unworkable within the current Board thinking about a
> top-down ALAC. For me, Jamie represents the voice of reason at this time.
> Others may disagree, including Vittorio and Izumi, whose tacit approval of
> an ICANN ALAC concept, albeit misguided in my view, also has some support.
> What is clear from both these efforts is that the fledgling IcannAtLarge.com
> *must* accommodate a range of possibly conflicting strategies to make
> substantive progress possible on *both* fronts, or the effort as a whole
> will divide, weaken or worse, become completely blocked.
>
> The best way I can think of to avoid this is:-
>
> 1. ELECTIONS - SUGGESTION:- Increase the number of elected representatives
> to 10 or 14, and constitute two panels of 5 or 7 each, with a single neutral
> Chair who primary role is to liaise between the two panels and uncover
> possible areas of consensus. The membership can then move between the two,
> or follow both, as they see fit on various issues, and other groups may
> eventually form from those initial two. The difference between this and the
> constituency model is there is no predestined groups or number of groups -
> they form naturally from like-minded people getting together. Also, the
> voting mechanism used is ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE  - regardless of how many
> groups one may or may not join ultimately.
>
> One problem with working within ICANN's ever moving goal posts is that
> ICANN's Bylaws currently do not allow a person to be appointed as an officer
> of more than one SO, (which may change), but at this time it is would not be
> prudent for YJ Park (not wishing to single her out - just an example) to
> take on an active role to represent this organization in an ICANN ALAC
> forum, while she remains active in the DNSO NC. There are many who would
> object to excluding anybody from the process, However, under the "two small
> panel" scenario, a person would not be precluded from taking up a position
> (if duly elected) on an At Large Panel tasked with dealing with issues that
> do not directly deal with ICANN - for example on Outreach/ multi-lingual
> issues and so on. This is a more effective way of dealing with conflict of
> interest than the previous "honor system" which doesn't work.
>
> 2. SUGGESTION - NAME OF ORGANIZATION: [ICANN]ATLARGE.COM but incorporating
> Opt-in/ Opt-out, meaning the reference to [ICANN] may be dropped from time
> to time as appropriate, so that in certain venues where long complicated
> historical details are not a factor, the organization would be known simply
> as ATLARGE.COM. Examples where this might occur would be outreach efforts to
> recruit new members, PR activities, dealings with the mainstream media,
> situations where we are riding on our own organization's reputation, not
> ICANN's - or in situations when there is unanimous opposition to a published
> ICANN Board position, and a certain distance is desirable. It's a flexible
> arrangement that will allow a fresh approach to a range of new activities,
> those that ICANN has failed at miserably - including but not limited to
> setting up a bank account, obtaining 501 (c) 3 status independently of
> ICANN, allowing for separate funding applications to be made of Markle, -
> while equally, allowing the organization to retain the [ICANN]ATLARGE.COM
> branding for recognition and continuity purposes within the ICANN Community,
> where it is already well known, particularly within what will be the ALAC
> forum. Contributions can then be made to specific group activities by the
> donor - [ICANN]AtLarge.com (possibly through ICANN's account for the ALAC) -
> or to a separate bank account set up for AtLarge.com.
>
> 3. ELECTION TIMELINE:- Danny is right. There are minimum guidelines that
> affect the credibility of the results and I insist they are deviated to such
> an extent so as to affect trust in the system used. I have another condition
> to impose on my involvement, related to Watchdogs, which I hope can be
> accommodated without any great difficulty, but given the traumatic news
> Elizabeth received today about the loss of a dear colleague, Peter de Blanc,
> I respectfully set aside detailed discussion of all aspects that inevitably
> concern her at this difficult time. It can wait a day or so.
>
> Regards,
> Joanna
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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