Re: [atlarge-discuss] I will not be a candidate

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

Jefsey and all,

  I no longer take Vittorio seriously.  I have come recently, as you
likely
know, to that decision.

  I also cannot see how the ALAC can possibly in it's present form,
represent stakeholders/usres within ICANN.

  The ISOC has been a god organization in the past.  ISOC
Italy was one of the ISOC's bastard step children.  Now, or
just not too long ago as you know, the ISOC did away with
the voting rights of individual members, some were long standing
members, and are members of INEGroup as well.  Many felt
and still feel betrayed by the than ISOC leadership, and in particular
Don Heath.

  The rest of you comments Jefsey, I agree with by in large...

J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:

> Vittorio Jeff and Bruce commented my position IRT Vittorio.
> I do not thik it is as simple as Jeff sees it. I will explain here
> the way I see it. I think I owe it to him.
>
> But first, Vittorio speaks of defamation. This could  be true if
> I had not been over cautious in going by the book: writing to him,
> writing to him copying Bruce as the third Panelist, wrting to him
> copying the 10 other panelists, then writing to him copying the whole
> Membership. Each time I sent him a private mail first. There
> is no defamation, but certainly substantiated questions by his
> silences and public disrepects of his own public writings and duties.
> I must said I hated what he made me to do.
>
> First, let be clear, Vittorio has many CIOs. But it is untrue that
> Panelists ignored them. Actually he openly discussed them, and
> I pushed him to keep relations with ICANN to keep a bridge open
> with them, however reluctant he was. I thanked him for that, I
> opposed Jamie and Joanna on that, in nominating Vittorio for Chair
> against Joanna. We never discussed (as far as I recall) his
> involvement in ISOC Italy: such an involvement is a good and an
> honorable thing we can all suppport (all the more than ISOC
> Europe is partly in conflict with ISOC).
>
> My understanding, based upon Vittorio's actions and mails is
> that he could have been a good Chair (we saw it in the first
> days) but that, as many, he confuses leading and commanding.
> When I compare his style with Joop, Hans or Joanna (the de
> facto leaders we had) he is no different, except that when Joop
> complexifies with democratic alibies, Hans tries to make endorsed
> what he imposed, Joanna wants to go by rules no one had read
> (all that is predictable), Vittorio is unpredictable as he
> fluctutates in positions, knowledge and delays. He says that he
> listens to the community, believing he serves it, but adding coups
> over coups.This is instable kingship, not simple matter of fact
> democracy. His only problem is the elected Panel. He knows
> he needs it, it seems he does not see what positive to do with it.
> This makes him to totally disrespect it.
>
> All these experiences, plus my own epxerience of extreme
> confort as the last Polling Officer of the IDNOn as a neutral
> servant to the community, lead me to propose a very, very
> simple way to manage this community.
>
> So you talk about COI for Vittorio. I would name it COD
> conflict of duties. Vittorio says himself that ALAC is no
> big deal but that no one cares about icannatlarge.org.
>
> This is true with two "buts" which make a difference:
>
> - ALAC is paying Vittorio's and Thomas' ticket to RIO.
>    I do not say they have been "purchased", but that
>    when an organization bores you by stupid mails and
>    another makes you fly to Rio, you tend to think you
>    can achieve more with the later than with the former. So,
>    you tend to favor the laters interests, for the sake of
>    common efficiency, all the more if the former"s poor
>    shape is in part your own fault.
>
>     Frankly, who would think differently?
>
> - As Vittorio points it out, no one cares about icannatlarge
>    and no one wants to hear about it. icannatlarge is a
>    problem for Vittorio, the same as Esther was/is a
>    problem for the BoD. You tend to reduce and forget
>    the problems.
>
>    So the same ICANN plays with ALAC, the same
>    Vittorio plaid with us. That was sad. It was poorly
>    made, with poor methods. Hopefully, the page is over.
>
>    Except: who has the domain name password?
>
> Jeff, you objected to me talking of the Panel. Please re-read
> I talked about Panelists. One of the most damageable
> thing Vittorio did was to send the list to Judyth and Jan
> and not to the Panelists (who could have passed it to
> them, hence my mail to ask them to accept it, both to
> protect them - there is a real trap - and the stability of
> our community). This brings us back more than one year
> back, in a worse situation. At that time Joop insured
> stability and direction, even if controverted.
>
> The only stability this organization has is its elected
> people. The current Panelists (Bruce, Vittorio and me).
> Its real pain is its two challengers: Vittorio and Joop,
> one distroying by organized mess, one destroying
> by messy questionning of everything.
>
> - Either we leave Vittorio to continue the mess in using
>    Judyth and Jan against the Panelists and Joop, and
>    then Joop will immediately fall into the trap (we start
>    knowing him - and seeing his mails :-), challenging
>    Vittorio through endless debates on Bylaws, questions
>    to everyone, polls after polls, etc feding-up everyone,
>    may-be electing a 5 or 7 people group, others will contest.
>
> -  Or we trust our own institution and do not favor anyone
>     but respect the authority of the Panel (only challenged
>     todate by quitting Panelists and by its Cgair). The
>     problem is that the Panel is only two persons today.
>
>     Is that sufficient or not?
>
>     I think it is sufficient to save the ship and that it is
>     not to govern the ship.
>
>     - one: all the elected panelists by right are welcome,
>       to increase our immediate protection against Joop
>       who was not elected and Vittorio who succeded
>       in "quitting with-in". Our problem with Joop and
>       Vittorio, is not to fight them, but to keep them equal
>       when they put themselves in simple Member position
>       (Joop in not being elected, Vittorio by his demeanor).
>       Richard, YJ Park, Hans or Jamie did not quit to start
>       governing.
>
>     - two: this is why I proposed a simple plan - but I
>       needed it to be endorsed by the Chair to be
>       democratic, or the Chair to publicly fail. What he
>       now has done.
>
>       The plan is to organize elections. Without reinventing
>       the wheel. 11 panelists elected in the simplest way,
>       for a simple mandate (manage the list, manage the
>       site, enter MoUs with who wants if the Members say
>       yes, incorporate). This will not result form a long debate
>       (itwill come in due time), but being written on the ballot,
>       as the mission statement of the elected Panelist.
>
>        - incorporation of the list/site management is a
>          must to protect the Members from what has just
>          happened. Whatever Vittorio may say, he gave
>          Judyth and Jan our names and e-mails to third
>          parties. We gave it to the organization, ie to
>          its elected trustees. Today I can sue Vittorio,
>          Judyth and Jan (very weak, but it legally stands;
>          if there was substential spamming that could be
>          different). Please remember how Joop was a
>          pain but was right about protecting the list.
>
>          This Membership must have the legal capacity
>          to ask the hosting company or the registrar to
>          give them a new  password.
>
>       - a most limited mandate permits to limitate the
>         problems of the Panel and to protect us against
>         its chair's kingmanship. Time has come for
>         Republic :-)
>
>       - MoUs because we must be able to change and
>         extend, organize that mission, and because we do not
>         want to waste our time in long debates Joop/JFC
>         or DPF/JFC etc... over the whole story, to support
>         Sotiris representation, or DPT or Danny's efforts.
>         When there is a need, anyone can popose something
>         and get a vote. MoUs because we can enter them
>         easily once incorporated and they are not as rigid
>         as bylaws. But most of all they can be progressive.
>
>         If more is needed, Members will vote.
>
> Now, some will tell me: who made yo King to propose this.
> I will say: "no, one". My intend is to see this organization
> to go through, not to command or reign over it.
>
> I will not be a candidate.
> jfc
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801



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