Re: [atlarge-discuss] No icannatlarge.com reps on ERC task force

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

I think it is absolutely obvious that Vittorio and Gabriel should say to
Denise: "If we participate, we do so as representatives not only of ISOC
Italy, not only of LatinoamerICANN, but also of IcannAtLarge. And we reserve
the right of IcannAtLarge to draft in a different representative to take our
place, although we would continue to represent our other organisations."

I think Vittorio and Gabriel should insist that IcannAtLarge is given
representation in this process.

Isn't it TYPICAL that Denise and the ICANN establishment are "top-down"
deciding who participates, "nominating" their own chosen decision-makers,
instead of letting the various AtLarge groups represent themselves and
organise themselves.

This is all the ICANN Board's initiative, all their agenda.

Unless the process is reversed, and major players like IcannAtLarge are
involved and included, and unless the decision-making comes from the At
Large participants themselves (not by invitation from on high by Denise and
the Board) then we should ultimately reject the process.

First we're not allowed to elect our own representatives on the ICANN Board.

Now our own representatives are even locked out of At Large processes too.

We should insist on these things:

The AtLarge initiative associated with the administration of the DNS will be
run like this - it will be run "bottom-up" and the AtLarge participants will
determine for themselves how they want to organise, what policies they want,
what they demand, what they stand for; it will elect its own leadership, not
have people "nominated" to lead or advise etc by Denise Michel and the ICANN
board; it will demand at least half the Board members on the ICANN Board; it
will be run independently of ICANN to give it a free voice and the ability
to criticise or express alternative opinions; it will operate its own public
forum; it will operate its own mailing list; ICANN officials will RESPOND to
all serious questions raised on these forums and lists; it will vote on all
issues of importance; it will be an At Large initiative, determined by its
participants, not an ICANN scheme imposed by ICANN (with the purpose of
conning DoC etc).

In short, our relationship with this ICANN initiative (which is a cunning
trick by the Board) is extremely problematical.

Unless we, the AtLarge in our various organisations, run the At Large - and
insist on how we want it run - then we should not acknowledge this "AtLarge
trick" at all.

All is not lost yet. There is a process going on. But at the very least,
Vittorio and Gabriel should protest in the loudest possible terms about the
exclusion of IcannAtLarge.com from this important planning/decision group.

Will they insist to Denise Michel that Sotiris or Satyajit or someone we
appoint is asked onto this working group? We have chosen them to represent
us.
They should not be excluded in this important planning stage.

regards

Richard Henderson

----- Original Message -----
From: Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>; <DannyYounger@cs.com>
Cc: Gabriel Piñeiro <gpineiro@derecho.org.ar>; Vittorio Bertola
<v.bertola@bertola.eu.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 4:58 AM
Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] No icannatlarge.com reps on ERC task force


> From: DannyYounger@cs.com [mailto:DannyYounger@cs.com]
[snip] The following individuals will help craft workable
> implementation
> details on such a Committee, building on the Blueprint for Reform and the
> Board's subsequent Bucharest Resolution: Gabriel Piñeiro
> (LatinoamerICANN);
> Tommi Karttaavi (ISOC Finland); Peter M. Shane (InSITeS -
> Institute for the
> Study of Information Technology and Society); Núria de la Fuente Teixidó
> (STEC – Sistemas Técnicos de Enseñanza Consultores); Edmundo Valenti
> (Internet Society Argentina Chapter); Vittorio Bertola (ISOC Italy); and
> Izumi Aizu (former NAIS member – NGO and Academic ICANN Study)."
> http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/status-report-24jul02.htm
>
> Please note that icannatlarge.com designated representatives were
> not asked
> to participate (excluded) in this effort.

Actually Danny, icannatlarge.com is going through a process to designate
many future representatives and I'm sure once that process is complete, the
ExCom can select one of their number to press Denise for a seat, or if not,
we can submit our own recommendations to the ERC, DoC, Board, whoever. I'm
not overly concerned about that aspect.

What does concern me is that Candidates Piniero and Bertola have publicly
disassociated themselves with icannatlarge.com by accepting their seats on
the Committee as representatives of other organizations.

I think the membership needs to be clear about how Candidates intend to deal
with conflict of interest if elected to the icannatlarge.com ExCom and
clearly this is one of them.

Personally, I don't have any conflicts of interest, and I hate to say this,
but I do not agree it is appropriate for any Member of the ICANNAtLarge.com
ExCom to be sitting at a table representing another organization while this
organization also needs representation at the same table. Furthermore, the
"multiple hats" game doesn't work with me.

Let me state for the record that neither of these candidates will get my
vote unless I see a clear and unequivocal pledge to resign their seats on
this Committee as representatives of other organizations if duly elected to
the Icannatlarge.com ExCom.

Regards,
Joanna


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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