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

RE: [atlarge-discuss] Short-term goals



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Judith Oppenheimer [mailto:j.oppenheimer@worldnet.att.net]
> To: 'James Love'; 'Norbert Klein'
> > 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,

Judith wrote:
> Jamie, my resignation stated no such absurd possibility or fact.
>
> I have explained in some detail the reasons for my resignation in
> limited private correspondence, but saw no benefit to further
> communication on the matter on list, thinking it best for everyone
> concerned to simply move forward in a positive direction.

Jamie,
If you had checked the archive, you would know that changing from a .com to
.org, other than as a defensive registration, was an election pledge of
mine. This has nothing to do with the trademark issue.
>
> However, continued misstatement of fact will make me rethink how the
> public record should reflect recent events.

I concur.

>
> > attempts to get things moving in August are always difficult,
> > given how many people travel and take vactions then.
>
> Apparently Joe Sims and Stuart Lynn kept working, bringing in Nancy
> Victory's signature ahead of schedule.   (I wonder how many hours Sims
> billed ICANN for August.)

Even if we were to accept that August is a global holiday, which I do not,
what happened to September? You have not provided a satisfactory explanation
for chronic absenteeism since your election, but I'm delighted to see you
doing some work now. About time.

Regards,
Joanna

> --------
> Judith Oppenheimer
> http://JudithOppenheimer.com
> http://ICBTollFreeNews.com
> http://WhoSells800.com
> 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Love [mailto:james.love@cptech.org]
> > Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 9:44 AM
> > To: Norbert Klein
> > Cc: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
> > Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Short-term goals
> >
> > 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