Re: [atlarge-discuss] conference call

[eric@www.hi-tek.com]

YJ and Joanna must do as they deem appropriate and I am one of their biggest fans. I in no way mean this as a criticism of them.
Jefsey I have talked to on the phone and met in Melbourne, so I am well aware of the value of increased communications.
But I am inclined to think that it is a very good stand that he takes here;
One is dollar count,
and the other is that he is standing on a principal which we should be guided by and I really feel that that is the most important thing we can give this internet.
We have technical and legal expertise what we seem to be lacking in is conviction and morality, a commitment to the little users. A fiduciary duty not to a corp but to our users.

Hey I hope you have a great conference and I hope it is productive, I have already prayed for it and support all of the participants.

I merely point out that Jefsey has a great point and is good in standing by it like a man.

Eric

---------- Original message ----------
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 13:11:51 +0200
From: J-F C. (Jefsey)  Morfin <jefsey@club-internet.fr>
Reply-To: J-F C. (Jefsey)  Morfin <jefsey@club-internet.fr>
To: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
Subject: [atlarge-discuss] conference call

Dear Panelists,
For reasons I gave to everyone I will not share in the today conference call.

1. I am fighting this system as inapropriate to the "crowd" oriented 
Internet nature everywhere, this is not to use it in my own organization. 
IMHO it is an outdated, inherently biased, innovation freezing, etc. 
system. We are looking for money, budget, incorporation - what may cost $ 9 
for a DN, $ 30 to incporate and $ 60 a year to host. I do not accept that 
we may plan to collectively spend $ 4000 this year with AT&T. What may 
represent several years of salary for certain of our members.

2. this is absolutely not an antagonism to the Chair nor to YJ Park who 
initiated the project. But if I want to give a chance to this project to 
survive I think I must be inflexible about everything which may block it.

3. I therefore ask the Chair to read the above paragraph 1 and 2 to explain 
my position and why I do not participate. So it is registered and in the 
records.

4. I would striogly object if any vote was taken under the pressure of such 
a system. Should one be taken I ask Richard Henderson to represent me, and 
you to accept his vote on my behalf.

5. On the current issues:

     - I do not understand anything to the discusion about a name which 
confuses/delays everything.

       We only need names to incorporate a secretariat for the @large and 
for a site.
       The name for the secretariat is part of the WG-INC job.
       Establishing links to the site under all the possible alias 
denominations is the job of WG-WEB

    - I see that all this has made the list lose momentum and a lot of 
energy wasted.

      I call for a clear definition of the panel as a catalyst for the 
movement development no more.
      A clear netiquette of the movement to be progressively worked out as 
policy statements
      Simple working procedures to be established and the necessary tools 
(wiki+) developped
      Examples are under http://icannatlarge.org

    - I see an opportunity to recover the momentum, perform outreach and 
support Hans, Michael, Jamies efforts IRT ICANN and ERC through a triple 
candicacy of YJ, Eric and Vivek (to clearly show we do not seek a lost 
victory but to use a plateform and demonstrate the inadequacy of a system 
where the least endorsed person will get elected).

Thank you and have fun.
jfc

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