[atlarge-discuss] Re: 005 Mission Statement ... (and Name)

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

HelpOK thanks Jefsey

I could go with this one, if Sotiris is happy with us using the name www.worldatlarge.org

It does at least "trump" Icann's hand, because "World" @large is bigger than anything else, and it conveys the the two key issues of being a worldwide movement of ordinary people demanding enfranchisement, plus the @large concept (which will please the people with very focussed sights on this central battle.

I do feel, though, that the somewhat broad wording of my proposed mission statement (which Jefsey has kindly copied) helps protect BOTH wings of our organisation. It clearly sets our sights on the target of control of the ICANN board. But it is worded broad  enough to attract a wider membership.

As Jefsey as suggested (and I can see the sense of this very much), having set up the "world@large" mission statement (which is, if you like, the all-embracing one - it will embrace the tow "wings" of our movement, I think)... there is every opportunity to draft other statements/ which further define specific missions for specific constituencies within our organisation.

It took me a while to understand where Jefsey was coming from, but now I do understand it, I feel very positive about it.

So, as Jefsey has proposed the name and statement beneath, I would like to second it - and ask that we either vote on it, or accept it along with other combinations of name and mission, to put to the membership.

I think its important the name and mission statement are mutually supporting, and as I've made clear, I think it's important that we can accommodate Hans view of our objectives, with the views on strategy held by members like myself. Additionally, Judith would be happy to see the absence of the dreaded ICANN name... indeed, the substitution of "World" for "ICANN" just about says it all.

Joanna, please could we have a period of 2 or 3 days to sound out member opinion at the end of which we vote (and also vote on any alternative proposals of course). I'm not trying to be (too) pushy!

Richard (hoping Sotiris would agree with this, as he holds the name)

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin 
  To: atlarge-panel@lists.fitug.de 
  Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 7:49 PM
  Subject: [atlarge-panel] call to the chair: example of policy statement


  At 13:20 09/08/02, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
  >A) You could build:
  >   A1) a single monolithic organization, or
  >   A2) a federal organization with the centre plus local chapters, or
  >   A3) a lightweight "glueing" organization - something that has not
  >only individual members, but also organizational members, and that
  >wants to act as point of coordination and confrontation for all At
  >Large-related entities and individuals in the world.
  >
  >B) You could build:
  >   B1) a generic Internet user organization (thus entering in direct
  >competition with, just to name one, ISOC, even if ISOC is now shifting
  >towards an industry organization), or
  >   B2) an organization focused by mission on Internet governance, or
  >   B3) an organization focused by mission on DNS governance, or
  >   B4) an organization whose mandate is limited to participation in
  >ICANN.
  >
  >Personally, I think that for what regards to A, we have to go for A3 -

  1. I agree on A3 / B2

  We have to adopt a simple position: we accept the people as they come and 
  propose. When somone is good at something or at some relation we support 
  his action if coordinated with others.

  This is the trick of the Policy Statement. We establish their potential 
  frame so people know where they can fit. When someone can write a Policy 
  Statement: we review it, propose the GA to review, and wtach the result. If 
  it develops: good. If it does not: we have a doctrine others can build upon 
  in related areas. At the end of the day we will have people, concepts, 
  documents in proper order.

  We are here to lead. Not to direct.


  2. call to the chair

  as an example I propose we adopt the 000.General Mission statement attached 
  presented by Richard.

  I copy it in here since attachements seems to be refused.


  world@large
  000. General Policy Statement



  Context: 
    This document is part of the world@large organization policy statements. Its purpose is to define the general orientation of the world@large organization. Its editorial rules are defined in the 010 Edition of the world@large Policy Statement. 
  Status: 
    This revision is the initial draft by Richard Henderson 
  Text: 
    world@large is a worldwide organization which aims to give more power to ordinary internet users in the way the internet is run and developed, both globally and at national level.






    We believe that the internet is a priceless world resource, which should not be controlled by big business or vested interests, and that it truly belongs to millions of ordinary people, who use it, develop it, share on it, communicate with it, trade, educate, and help through it.






    In pursuit of these ideals, we seek the decisive elected representation or ordinary users on the governing bodies of the Internet including the ICANN board. We believe in the democratic control of the net through online elections and open dialogue and involvement.






    world@large invites all users of the Internet to click and join this exciting international movement, reaching to every country in the world. "It's YOUR Internet" and we urge you to protect it and keep it in the hands of ordinary people. Everyone counts. You have the right and you have the power to keep the Internet free. "