Re: [atlarge-discuss] ERC vs At-Large Representation

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Hans and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

  I also am glad that YJ is in Shanghai as well.  I would never
presuppose that she speaks for users everywhere however.

  YJ is a panel member yes.  She does not speak for our
fledgling organization however as such is beyond the
panel members mandate.  YJ is a good person and
has some very good ideas to be sure.  But she can only
legitimately speak for herself and hopefully also in some
areas, speak to some of some users concerns and
positions...  But that's about it at this juncture...

  Bad form here Hans.  Please don't repeat it!

Hans Klein wrote:

> YJ,
>
> Thanks for these excellent comments!  I am very happy that you were in
> Shanghai to speak on behalf of users everywhere.



>
>
> Hans
>
> At 05:32 PM 10/30/2002 +0900, YJ Park wrote:
> >Dear members,
> >
> >This comment was directed to ERC during the public forum of ICANN.
> >
> >Regards,
> >YJ
> >-----------------------------------------------------
> >YJ Park, Elected panel member of ICANNatlarge.org
> >
> >I appreciate the Board for incorporating At-Large Advisory Committee after
> >Bucharest. On the other hand, I also want to ask the Board to remember the
> >initial promise made by DoC and white paper, 9 Board of directors from
> >at-large constituency.
> >
> >Alejandro Pixanty, Chairman of ERC during his presentation placed high
> >emphasis on the criticality on building "TRUST" with ICANN. However, until
> >individual users can get more specific answers from the Board to the
> >At-Large representation, individual users shall have difficulties with
> >cementing "TRUST" with ICANN and DoC.
> >
> >After four years' challenge of developing a mechanism to reflect Individual
> >users' voices into ICANN's decision-making process since ICANN was created
> >in 1998 in following manner.
> >
> >Membership Advisory Committee in 1999,
> >At-Large Study Committee, NAIS, Interim Cordnating Committee in 2000, 2001,
> >ICANNatlarge.com, At-Large Organizing Committee in 2002,
> >and recently At-Large Advisory Committee Assistance Group with proposed
> >At-Large Advisory Committee.
> >
> >We reached a conclusion that no At-Large Board of Director. Therefore, ICANN
> >is becoming business association rather than consensus-building coordination
> >body
> >
> >In the name of Internet community, ICANN has been trying to include and
> >listen to ccTLD managers, business groups, Intellectual property groups,
> >RIRs, even the governments, but Individual users were sidelined without
> >appropriate representation guarantee. As of 1998, 9 board seats were
> >guaranteed for Individual users. Now, as of 2002, what individual users are
> >offered is 5 At-Large representatives on the Nominating Committee together
> >with other 13 constituencies. no single board seat is not guaranteed for the
> >individual users.
> >
> >If I may, on behalf of those who have worked hard on at-large representation
> >since its beginning, I think we have to admit that such enormous efforts and
> >energies put forth by many people ended up with failure in the ICANN
> >process.
> >
> >However, there are still ongoing efforts such as ICANNatlarge.org to build
> >At-Large constituency. With limited resources, election of the
> >representatives of ICANNatlarge.org was conducted in August with hope we can
> >be heard in ICANN's decision-making process.
> >
> >Here I would like to propose to the Board first the Board make substantial
> >efforts continuously to strengthen users voices in the representation and
> >make sure the At-Large Advisory Committee should establish a bottom-up
> >decision-making process as it is expected to in consultation with the
> >existing group.
> >
> >second, the Board considers forming a committee to  reintroduce 9 board
> >members from at-large constituency in the near future.
> >
> >Thank you for your attentions and consideration to the proposals.
> >
> >Please, refer to the web site for further specific comments.
> >
> >Follow-up question by Karl Auerbach, Lypman Chapman
> >
> >Comment by Hans, Alejandro
> >
> >Hans told that there was no commitment about 9 Board of Directors
> >in the white paper.
> >
> >Karl clarified the white paper ensured public representation promised
> >in the Congress by Esther.
> >
> >Alejandro expressed that the Board doesn't want to revisit 9 Board
> >of Directors.
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> >For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



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