Re: [atlarge-discuss] (fwd) Urgent input needed for ERC on At-Large ***please respond by Monday morning***

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

Vittorio and all stakeholders or other interested parties,

  We [INEGroup] are of the belief that the "Blueprint" that the ICANN
BoD is not and has not been shown to be in the best interest of the
stakeholders/users.  The ERC members are of course well aware
that this is the situation as each one of them have been long term
participants in the ICANN experiment.  We have sense dubbed
the "Blueprint" as the "Black-and-Blueprint" accordingly.

  Given the illegitimacy of the ICANN staff and BOD eliminating the
AT-Large that had already existed but yet needed some fine tuning
and additional openness, the ICANN BOD instead has chosen to move
in a politically motivated opposite direction in it's "Black-and-Blueprint"
with the ERC which is packed with only Intellectual Property sympathetic
personages and professional high paid lobbyist that have demonstrated
in word and deed, little of not interest in individual stakeholders/users
interest, in fact seek to eliminate their meaningful participation all together.
Hence we [INEGroup] members will seek to yet again try and find
ways and means by which the current ICANN BoD can either be
replaced in and open and transparent manner by ANY AND ALL
Interested stakeholders/users as put forth in the White Paper and the MoU.


Vittorio Bertola wrote:

> FYI - I just received this as a member of the ALOC:
>
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:31:06 -0700, "Denise Michel"
> <denisemichel@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >ICANN's ERC (Evolution and Reform Cmt.) has asked for assistance from
> >members of the At-Large Organizing Committee in filling in the details of
> >the Blue Print for Reform and the Board's subsequent Bucharest Resolution
> >(see http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/status-report-15jul02.htm
> >for more information).  Spcifically, the ERC has asked for our ideas on how
> >to structure an At-Large Advisory Committee (the ERC also will continue to
> >solicit public input on all aspects of reform).  The Board's Bucharest
> >Resolution directs the ERC to "consider the creation of an At Large Advisory
> >Committee as a potential vehicle for informed participation in ICANN by the
> >broad user community" and the ERC has asked the ALOC to provide initial
> >suggestions on this by ***July 26*** and detailed recommendations by August
> >16.  The ERC will then "take account of the input in making its
> >recommendations to the Board and the ICANN community."
> >
> >***Please let me know by Monday morning, July 22 (PDT) if you are available
> >to work on this via email (phone if needed) next week.***
> >
> >Thanks.
> >Denise
> >
> >Denise Michel
> >denisemichel@sbcglobal.net
> >408.867.1986
> >775.521.0778 (fax)
> >
> >PS.  This aggressive schedule is necessitated by ICANN's timeline: "The ERC
> >currently intends to provide a first Interim Implementation Report to the
> >community on or about 1 August 2002, and another such Interim Implementation
> >Report on or about 1 September 2002. A final set of ERC Implementation
> >Recommendations will be posted on or about 1 October 2002. The Interim
> >Implementation reports will set forth the ERC's then-current approach to
> >implementation details, and will invite community comment on the matters
> >discussed, probably generally following the format of the various ERC
> >Working Papers that led up to the Blueprint for Reform."  Final decisions by
> >the Board are expected at the  Shanghai meeting 27-31 October 2002.
>
> Moreover, a couple of days ago, after the "Status Report" was
> published by the ERC, I contacted privately a couple of Board members
> (the ones with whom we could discuss a little in Bucharest) to ask
> whether the Committee intended to build a specific task force to
> assist it in detailing the feasibility and mechanisms of the ALAC.
> Today I have received an answer that suggests me to discuss proposals
> in the ALOC. I guess that the ALOC will be the main channel the
> Committee will use to gather input from the public on the subject of
> ALAC implementation (though I hope the usual public forums will be
> usable as well).
>
> Of course, given the fact that we're in the middle of an election and,
> as usual, time given is very short, I don't think that we have the
> time to produce an official statement as an organization by July 26.
> However, it seems that there will be up to August 16 to produce "final
> recommendations", and I think the newly elected panel will be more
> legitimate in contributing to them. Anyway I will surely submit some
> personal ideas to the ALOC - and to this list.
> --
> vb.               [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<------
> ----------------------> http://bertola.eu.org/ <--------------------------
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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