[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[atlarge-discuss] The ICANNatlarge.com web page

These are a few comments on the ICANNatlarge.com web page.

1. When I ran for the temporary panel, I had very little to say, but expressed support for keeping the webmaster, "whoever" that was, and I thought the website was quite cool.

2. After the election, a few members of the new panel were apparently people who did web pages, and they wanted to re-do it. We discussed this, and some of us thought it would be best if the web page was done by non-panel members. Also, given the likihood that the current web page has some fancy stuff regarding the forums and interactive components, it was easier to just keep Joop as webmaster in the short run.

3. My own preference would be for a fairly simple web page that could be edited and maintained by more than one volunteer, to share the load a bit.

4. Then we began to discuss the bills that we being made by Joop to maintain the site. I was not aware we were being billed for anything by anyone, and did not see how anyone could expect to be paid like that without a contract or agreement. There was also an issue of NZ ISOC wanting to donate $1,000, which many panel members including myself thought was for Joop, and there was an informal consensus to facilitate this.

5. At one point SS did sent a note to Joop, the one that Joop posted to the list, offering to build the site for a fraction of what Joop had billed, but this was not something pursued by the panel, and in fact, several panel members indicated they did *not* want (a) panel members to run the web page or (b) panel members to be paid to provide services to icannatlarge.com.

6. The board discussed and reached I believe an informal consensus that 3 members of the panel would receive the passwords for the site, and we would put out a call for a webmaster. VB drafted a call for a webmaster, to be posted on the discuss list.

7. It was also becoming clear that there were some issues with the web site. In particular, requests to have clear and prominent links to the mailing lists and archives of the mailing lists were not being put up, and there was a growth of editorial material being put up or linked to the site that Joop seemed to be doing on his own, plus we were being billed for this. Even small stuff wasn't being fixed, like making it more clear that "register here" meant... sign up to become a member... or something more clear. But given the other problems, particularly the ERC proposals and Esther/Denise's new at-large.org effort, plus some controversy over the timing of the election, it was not a top priority.

8. In Bucharest I met with VB, Isumzi and Wolfgang, and was surprised to learn that Joop was refusing to turn over the passwords to the panel members, and that this was one reason that VB had not invoiced NZ for the $1,000. VB and I had differences on other issues, but I personally think VB was correct in this.

7. I asked Joop to turn over the passwords, and told him that was why VB had not invoiced the $1,000. Joop indicated he did not trust VB and other board members, because he disagreed with things they had done or said in Bucharest. b

8. Now we have what seems to be suggestions for an expanded and somewhat exalted role for the webmaster.. who has duties that are yet to be limited... VB is more or less on vacation... so we'll fix all of this later, with the new panel, I'm sure.

9. Mby only real concern is that Joop may want to use his access to the membership list to spam the membership... something I have strong feelings about, and something also I think could drive people away from the organization, if not report us to anti-spam groups. I would be pleased if Joop would agree not only to spam members now, but after he is replaced, to destroy his records of the membership lists, unless he is choosen by the new panel as one of the trusted parties to hold this information. I might add this is seems like a very simple and fair request.


Giampaolo Bonora wrote:
On Thu, 01 Aug 2002 20:00:26 +1200, Joop Teernstra
<terastra@terabytz.co.nz> wrote:


    Maybe you can let the election finish before turning this into a circus.
Nah, this thread you have started is useful, both for the voters and as orientation for the future webmaster.
My message calling for a new webmaster and making sure that the call is not limited to this non- transparent list was not circus.
A voting reminder for the purpose of increasing voter participation, was not circus either.

But the argument about it reveals more about some candidates priorities than any election statement ever could.


This thread when the elections are open remind us that icannatlarge has
a serious problem with the present webmaster, perhaps with the website -
but this is easier to address.

Joop, everyone here knows that your contributions, for the website and
to this list, are valuable. You are more skilled and experienced than
many of us, and you know this. But if you leverage on this too much,
the outcome will be far from your expectations (and from ours).

You said:

Even though I am responsible for the initial website, I am a lawyer, first and foremost. My interest is a workable democratic Constitution for the At Large, not the nitty-gritty of website updating.

Did I not decline my own participation in the election because I am still runing the website?

Yes, I think so.

As long as the Panels do not get staggered terms, the webmaster must provide continuity between elections. He must have a certain amount of freedom, especially when it concerns matters of resignation and transition.

No. His/her freedom should be only about how to put informations on the
website, not about substantive matters for the life of the organisation.
He has certainly the right to speak and to defend his opinion, but he
can't abuse his privileges. If this was not so clear to date, is because we have hear you, Joop
Teernstra, with your knowledge and your history, and not a fresh
graduate with some webdesign skills. But this is not a workable
democratic model after the bootstrap phase.

Joanna's proposal is a correct way to approach this problem, but before,
the next Panel should evaluate which kind of website is more appropriate
for this organisation now, and how much time the Panel want dedicate to
the website problem. Perhaps in this phase a simpler and less ambitious
website could work better to represent icannatlarge.


Giampaolo Bonora - bonora@nettuno.it

To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

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