[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[atlarge-discuss] Re: [ga] FYI: Working Paper on At Large Advisory Committee
- To: Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>
- Subject: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [ga] FYI: Working Paper on At Large Advisory Committee
- From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 19:12:24 -0700
- CC: Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de>, ga@dnso.org, atlarge discuss list <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
- Delivered-To: mailing list atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
- 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
- Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0207231432570.9220-100000@npax.cavebear.com>
Karl and all assembly members, stakeholders or other interested parties,
Here Here Karl! Well said and done!
Karl Auerbach wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Alexander Svensson wrote:
>
> > >Why not just have the groups directly inerface with ICANN?
> >
> > let me explain by taking a look at a very different Advisory
> > Committee...
>
> Please note that "Advisory" means that the advice has no force, no ability
> to compel.
>
> That means that an "advisory" body has no ability to hold ICANN to account
> for its actions.
>
> And it is accountability to the public that is so completely lacking from
> ICANN.
>
> An "advisory" body would be a sham and an insult to the public and its
> interest in the way that the Internet is run.
>
> The public requires a way to clearly mandate its views upon ICANN. This
> means, at a minimum, the ability to select the majority of people who sit,
> with full powers, on ICANN's decision making organs.
>
> Nothing less is adequate.
>
> > ... but the GAC is the formal interface between governments and ICANN.
>
> About the only "formal" role that I, as a member of ICANN's Board of
> Directors, have observed for the GAC is that its chairman often attends
> the pre-meeting dinner and that it issues highly equivocal reports
> designed to offend no one.
>
> > User groups currently *don't* have that kind of interface.
>
> Of course, not. ICANN has made it clear that the public interest is
> simply not part of ICANN's interest.
>
> Why do you think that ICANN would reverse its historical stance and
> respond to a public advisory committee?
>
> The public deserves nothing less than the ability to seat, and unseat, a
> majority of the members of ICANN's highest decision-making body.
>
> --karl--
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
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