Re: [atlarge-discuss] Short-term goals

[eric@hi-tek.com]

Dang,

This looks so good that I think I might start a membership campaign.

"the water we drink was at some time swallowed by someone on the other side of the world"
ed

We must all remember that running is for a race and walking is to achieve movement in the
right direction, there is no hurry, accept to do the journey right.

e

James Love wrote:

> Norbert,  I think things will move along now.  The panel was elected in the
> summer, and attempts to get things moving in August are always difficult,
> given how many people travel and take vactions then.  It was suprising to me
> that we had booard resignations over the possibility that the name might be
> changed from icannatlarge.com to icannatlarge.org,  but Hans is now the
> acting chair, and seems to be getting things moving, including working on
> the web page transition issue, with some others on the panel who had
> expressed interest in that topic, and I think the panel is pretty much in
> agreement of replace the resigned members with those who received the next
> highest votes.    In my own opinion, the first things are to make sure the
> board is redone in response to the 2 regisations, to fix the longstanding
> problems with the webpage, and make the web page a source of real
> information about the group, and to work on bylaws and other documents
> spelling out proceedures.   I believe there will be some working groups set
> up with open mailing lists for people to participate in on selected topics,
> such as bylaws, fundraising, or the pretty important issue of how we verify
> the members, something which is always used to cast doubt on the
> feasiability of the at-large having elections.   Jamie
>
> Norbert Klein wrote:
> >>On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Bruce Young wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Now that our name has been chosen, we have...several very
> >>>pressing tasks that must be attacked immediately
> >>
> >>   ...Yes
> >>
> >> 0a. "Well, then who's playin' first? Yes." - Our Panel: ...
> >
> >
> >
> > I think it is agreed that we have a lot to do, and we cannot do it all at
> > the same time.
> >
> > First things first would be for me to know who is the panel at present.
> >
> > Yes, we had one. Then there were resignations. Then there were suggestions
> > how to proceed, and there was even reference to a clear good old text which
> > provided how to proceed: to let those move up who had received the next highest
> > votes. But there were also several suggestions that people who had resigned
> > might reconsider (I have not seen any answer to this from the persons
> > concerned).
> >
> > So I think it is clear procedurally who is the present panel.
> >
> > If this correct, can the present panel members please say who they are, and
> > that they agree on this composition. Just to avoid any further discussion and
> > delays.
> >
> > Next: the webmaster. Joop has been doing a good job (I think). He asked for
> > somebody else to take over. Sotiris volunteered.
> >
> > I did not get the information that Joop refuses stubbornly to hand over.
> > What I understood is that he wanted a clear vote from the panel, so that things
> > proceed properly - and I do not remember to have seen this vote (I always
> > concede that I may not have seen something which is important, or that I did not
> > understand it sufficiently - that is why I try to put my simple
> > understanding up here, asking to either correct me, or, if possible, to move along).
> >
> > So if we know for sure who the panel is, then I would hope the panel can
> > clearly say what and when should happen with the webmaster task (and the content
> > of our web site). If my scenario is too simple, Joop and Sotiris will surely
> > correct me here.
> >
> > And then are the other questions: mission statement, bylaws drafting, where
> > has which paperwork been filed (nothing, nowhere, I think), finance committee
> > (to start thinking now what to do once the paperwork has been filed and a
> > bank account can be opened).
> >
> > And I think one very important task for the panel is to look into the agenda
> > and timetable of ICANN - the board meets end of October, and at-large is on
> > the agenda. There were detailed references how ICANN is seeing the next
> > steps. I think the one year extension given by the US DoC sees the stakeholder
> > participation different from what the ICANN timetable projects. That means: hard
> > and quick work is necessary to analyse the DoC statement for at-large
> > concerns, and then bring some of this analysis to the membership.
> >
> > I do not think that everything can be drafted by the membership, and I trust
> > that the panel - once it is starting to work on ICANN/at-large challenges
> > now that the name odyssey is over - will come with some short-term suggestions
> > which we should be able to comment on and agree in general - and then let the
> > panel communicate with others: other at-large organizations and the ICANN
> > staff and board. But to wait and not work on the DoC/ICANN/At-Large agenda
> > until we have a full fledged system of bylaws will only result in having missed
> > the train even more...
> >
> > That's what I think about short-term urgent next steps.
> >
> > Norbert
> >
>
> --
> ------
> 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


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