Re: [atlarge-discuss] Correction re: Results from "URGENT: Guidance requested" mini-ballot

[espresso@e-scape.net]

Okay, Jefsey, I'll give this one last try:

At 09:02 +0100 2003/03/14, J-F C. (Jefsey)  Morfin wrote:
>On 19:25 12/03/03, espresso@e-scape.net said:
>>Jefsey Morfin has written to me off-list again at some length
>>in response to my posting of yesterday.
>
>If I did, it was a mistake. The response was meant to be public.
>I will try kindly a last, last time.
>
>In your reponse you say that you would have given the list to
>the remaining Panelists should they have agreed.
>
>I am sorry, this is what you stubbornly refuse. There are
>two Panelists left active, there are three officially.
>1. Vittorio committed to do it should Richard confirmed his
>     retirement.
>2. I asked you several times.
>3. Bruce confirmed

Let's be perfectly clear here:

1) I am NOT responsible for what some other person does or does
   not do. I did not ask Vittorio to send me the list, and I
   certainly didn't ask him not to give the list to his
   fellow-Panelists. You're blaming the wrong person for that.

2) When you as an individual asked that I give you the file
   Vittorio sent me, it carried exactly the same weight as if
   any other member did the same thing. It is my belief that
   it would be unethical for me to open the list myself without
   the permission of the Panel or the members, let alone give
   it to others.

3) There are three Panelists of record -- Bruce, Eric Dierker
   and yourself -- and the other two have not said "give the
   file to Jefsey" or said "two out of three on the Panel
   resolved that Jefsey should have it" so I didn't give it
   to you but asked the group openly and hoped they would
   give me some guidance.

>I do not understand anything to your technical comments
>on vote. I have proposed a method professionals in here
>and the other Panelist have applauded. I have removed
>myself from competition to be able to support it (what makes
>me to want to control  the organization :-) :-) :-) ....

You have indeed proposed a method. The problem for me is that
there has been no
   - Panel resolution confirming that the method will be used
   - confirmation from Joop that he will give you the
     administrative control you desire
   - call for the two technical experts and two others
     to serve as *your* watchers, or at least an explanation
     of what your method would require of us
   - general agreement that your method should be the one

Therefore, even if you assume that the election is to be
conducted as you wish, I am not authorized to make that
assumption myself.

Also

>I am afraid that "yes", once you start being involved with
>vote organization you do NOT claim to have any agenda
>and shut your month about everything which is not vote
>organization - and you certainly do not talk about YOUR
>own understanding of what is debated (as you do at
>length in your response).

won't wash with me, I'm afraid. You may not like it but the
fact remains that - even assuming your method and rules
were the ones agreed upon - you cannot simply tell somebody
to shut up on the grounds that they should have *guessed*
you considered them bound by a vow of silence. Nobody said
"anyone who volunteers to help with the election must
promise not to post anything from now until it's over"
and, as I've said, I would not necessarily have volunteered
if they had.

Jefsey, I like and respect you but I'm a grown woman and a
full citizen of a democratic society. I am not accustomed
to people trying to intimidate me into silence, and I have
no intention of becoming an automatic second-class citizen
on the Internet just because I'm female, either.

Stop and think a moment, Jefsey: who gave you the right to
tell any other member of this group what they can and cannot
say? Answer: nobody. You are a member just as I am, with
the same rights and privileges and no more than anyone else.

>Now, I note that your understanding of what is to happen
>next is pure dream, no real action, hopes that others
>will do or vote. Only one thing is for sure: that you will not
>permit anyone doing it in transferring the information you
>wrongly received to anyone legitimate (Panel and watchdogs)
>or possibly efficient (Joop) which needs it and know how
>to use it.
>
>After all, may be you are right.

The test of that, I think, is the reaction of the other
people in this discussion.

What Bruce, your fellow-Panelist said in response to my
mini-ballot's results was
>>Outstanding!  I don't have time to comment tonight, but I'll
>>work on it tomorrow at work and send it when I get home.
and I am eagerly awaiting his comments.

Jan, the other recipient of Vittorio's file and one of the
"watchdogs" within Joop's own setup, had supported my effort
to clarify what the group (as opposed to some individuals) had
decided to do.

You can see for yourself what others did or did not say
about the ballot and its results on this list. Unusually,
not one person said "Judyth, you're an idiot" or "nobody
wants to be bothered with voting" or anything else that
negative. Joop wanted his request for the list to have
been counted as a vote, a "lurker" suggested that we
might avoid controversy by asking Karl Auerbach to hold
the list and Elizabeth Portneuve to conduct the election,
and you took to lecturing me that concern about using
undemocratic methods to make decisions within a democratic
organization
a) should not be expressed openly
b) especially by me under a "contract" I hadn't seen, let
   alone signed, and
c) would "kill" the organization.

>All this is no worth spending time anymore. Thank you for
>your past help. Bruce let me know if we acknowledge the
>show is over or do you think we may still serve here?

I obviously can't answer for anyone else and I hope people
will *say* what they think of all this. At the risk of
boring everyone again, it is simply *not possible* to form
a democratic grassroots organization without
a) organizing in some meaningful fashion, and
b) encouraging the "grassroots" to participate fully.

I have been in this group for many months now and tried
very hard to put 30+ years of organizational experience
at its service. I have tried to encourage the development
-- through open discussion -- of principles and procedures
which would enable this group to work together *as a group*
and towards a mutually-defined common goal.

I have tried to say - in action as well as words - that Internet
governance is too important to everyone to leave it in the hands
of an elite of self-selected "experts". Not one person in this
group has come out openly and said I'm wrong about that - after
all, the raison d'etre of this group was to stop ICANN from
acting as that elite - but some people whose backgrounds are
in technology rather than activism are apparently not too
comfortable with anything but a top-down "do what I tell you"
approach or unilateral decision-making.

It is my considered opinion that this group will remain
nothing but marginalized and unrepresentative as long as it
is unable to govern itself democratically, and it won't be
able to do that unless its members decide that's what they
are willing to do in order to persuade ICANN et al. that
*they* should govern themselves and the Internet democratically.

I think if that opinion is rightly said to be "killing the
atlarge", then the "atlarge" was a sham from the beginning
and the people who care about fairer Internet governance
and the broader community of Internet users need to
organize themselves elsewhere under some other name.

I'll be perfectly willing to resign from this group and
leave it to Jefsey and Joop and the rest of the guys if
that's what people want. Just say so, on or off the list,
and I won't bother you again.

Sincerely,

Judyth


##########################################################
Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
##########################################################
"A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
"Un mot suffit aux sages; pour les autres, il en faut plus."
##########################################################



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