[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] Resignation
Richard and all,
I agree and have taken note that 5 members thus far have ask for new
elections to replace ALL of the current "Panel" members. It would
seem to me that we need to outline what those panel members
responsibilities are specifically also. There is also and additional
problem with using Joops "Polling Booth" as it is not well trusted,
and is not part of the ICANNATLARGE.ORG web site which
is the official Web site for this fledgling organization. Hence
participation will be less than optimal and than after the fact
considered illegitimate in the results.
Hence again I would call for and also aid in providing a voting/polling
system/process for ICANNATLARGE.ORG so as to rectify these
Richard Henderson wrote:
> There is an agreed process for dealing with these resignations, and that is
> to replace resigning panel members with the candidates who scored next
> highest in the election.
> At the same time, what matters most of all is that we respond to the wishes
> and desires of our membership.
> Some people have called for fresh elections.
> With the launch of the Polling Booth we are equipped to find out the opinion
> of our grassroots.
> I am clear that this is a vital tool to help define clearly what our
> membership actually wants on a number of issues.
> I endorse Joop's message to the whole membership, calling on people to vote
> on issues or propose issues, for the following reasons:
> (a) Why should we be afraid of the membership telling the panel what it
> (b) The process of trying to move forward through a "panel" has not really
> been successful - this may be because the panel didn't really know what this
> org was for... it may be the result of some deliberate delay to give the
> fake RALOs time to evolve... it may be because the "balance of power" for
> decision making should not rest with the (sometimes hidden) agenda of a few
> (c) We need to decide on new elections immediately, and it's the membership
> as a whole who should decide this, because only they have the mandate to
> overturn the rules of the previous election.
> (d) We have waited long enough for: mission statement; views on ICANN's
> RALOs; the direction we should take. We've tried doing that through the
> present panel and in truth we've just had inertia.
> (e) The Polling Booth is a "bottom up" initiative, not passed by the panel,
> but as the panel is disintegrating and hardly passing anything, I go for the
> "bottom up" approach which at least returns some power to the ordinary grass
> roots membership. That is the justification and mandate for Joop sending out
> the details to the whole membership, and activating a new process.
> (f) In the long run, this enfranchisement of ordinary members - to ask their
> own questions and vote on issues for themselves - is a very exciting
> development... a further step in the democratisation of our organisation and
> hopefully in the future democratisation of the Internet. The "old order" is
> ICANN's way : "top down"... decided by people "in charge" ... but we have
> the technology to stand in real contrast to ICANN and its nominated ALAC...
> we can still elect people to carry out duties, but the decisions and
> directions can be clearly defined and determined by the members themselves.
> I really appreciated Jamie Love's motion in the GA for a re-bid of ICANN's
> contract. That had some impact. I wish Jamie well, because he is as
> sceptical about ICANN as I am.
> I personally urge all members to participate in the coming "Referendum" at
> the Polling Booth, because we need to get on, and it's been demonstrated
> that we can't even define a mission statement until the membership defines
> what mission it wants.
> I would also ask Joop to include a further question:
> Do you want new elections for a new panel at the earliest opportunity? YES
> __ NO __ ABSTAIN __
> My own view is that we should FIRST define our mission and goals (through
> Referendum); and then SECOND press forward with new elections so that a
> panel that is prepared to carry through our members' wishes can be elected
> to actually set things in action.
> The action can, I believe, be dynamic and sensibly rapid, once we've defined
> what we're about. But every month we drift on with our present stalemate, we
> give ICANN a further chance to consolidate their "top down" coup.
> 5 out of 11 panel members have resigned. A 6th panel member is nowhere to be
> seen. Our progress has halted for lack of democratic consultation.
> It's time for democratic consultation on a whole range of issues - time for
> the grassroots to decide on our future - and the sooner the Referendum
> starts the better. No more delays. No procedural constraints. Just the voice
> of the membership taking control. In the present circumstances, the panel
> and its procedures must be subordinated to the "bottom up" voice of the
> Once we've heard the members, *then* we'll know how to proceed, and proceed
> with urgency.
> Richard Henderson
> Richard Henderson
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: James Love <email@example.com>
> To: Michael Geist <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: <email@example.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 3:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [atlarge-panel] Resignation
> > I also tender my registration from the panel.
> > Jamie
> > Michael Geist wrote:
> > > Panelists and members,
> > >
> > > I hereby tender my resignation from the panel.
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com