Re: [atlarge-discuss] 006 Deciding Name for Organisation

[Vittorio Bertola <vb@vitaminic.net>]

On Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:29:49 -0700, you wrote:

>I think that the mission statement is more important since that to a large
>stake will constrain what the name likely is...

I think that first we should decide some basic points about what we
want to be - then the mission statement and the name will descend as a
consequence.

I posted to the panel list what in my view are the two primary
questions we have to answer to determine what our organization wants
to be. I'll repost them here:

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'm for A3 and B2 or B3.
-- 
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