RE: [atlarge-discuss] 21 Questions to candidates

["Abel Wisman" <abel@able-towers.com>]

Hmm my definition of a "quickie" is completely different from yours, and
to be honest, I am not so attracted to them but then again, to each his
own and variety of spice makes life more interesting.
These questions however not alone in their number but also in the depth
are far from quick fire questions.
Nonetheless, an attempt at answering:

> I would be interested in a few quickies:
(never thought I would hear a Frenchman say that!)

> 1. how do you define an @large?

Besides the obvious criminal on the loose, I would say in this context
it would be the total user-representation.

> 2. what is your understanding of the @large community?

See 1 (and there are a lot of them)

> 3. is your understanding of our needed structure: 
> centralized, federal, 
> confederal?

Growing up one will have to go through all stages in order to become a
workable entity.
For now we need centralized control, with fast and well constructed
proposals to the community, that will ultimately lead to more and more
"members" and a "clear" structure for the near future.
However when things grow, it will become clear that when the
organization realizes 5% of its potential that centralized governing
does not work that simple, communication lines will become to long,
listwise discussion to busy and massive so that de-centralization will
become a need more then anything else.
In the end, if we ever reach 10-15% of our potential we can only be an
organization of sub-organizations world wide and as such a
representative body. There is no way you can lead a proposal or have a
discussion with millions at the same time.

> 4. do you want to see people using the internet in their own 
> language or in 
> English or extended English to some local wording?

I would like every user to feel at home and at ease, certainly that
would be in their native tongue, though others might have a hard time
understanding, in the end however there will be both without a doubt.

> 5. do you have a definition for domain name?

address

> 6. what is the main target you want to achieve in being 
> elected at the Panel? 

To get the organization on the rails and ready for others to run it
along.

7. how many languages do you read? 

5 - 6 

8. 
> have you met the people of your NIC before? 

I have met several representatives of several NIC's used in the sense of
local domain authority.

9. did you 
> already meet with the press on an Internet issue? 

yes

10. how 
> many minutes a day do yo expect to be able to dedicate to the 
> Panel 

What is needed, otherwise I would not run.

11. do you intend to run for Chair? Do you have some 
> ideas about the way 
> the Panel should organize?

That is 2 questions for the price of one! 
Do I intend to run for chair ? Perhaps the panel should propose a number
of candidates which it then should bring to the vote to the users (quick
straw-poll matter) that way I wont have to answer a question I do not
know the answer to yet, because it all depends on the final members of
the panel.

> 12. from this year experience how long do you think you will 
> stay in the 
> Panel?

Well somewhat longer then the last ones, but I do not see that this
panel will need a year to setup the things most of us have in mind,
after that there will be a new election, and whatever comes then we will
see then, but it is my guess that the panel will stay on between 4 and 9
months to do the tasks ahead of her.

> 13. one of the few things the Panel did this year was to 
> indentify that WGs 
> should not be headed by Panel Members but that they should 
> count a Panel 
> member to liaise with the Panel. This was obviously absolutely not 
> enforced. What is your opinion?

WG's should be plentiful and open to all, the panel should only suggest
a few members to "chair" the WG and the chair should report to the
community and/or panel. Participants in a WG should be focussed on the
topic of the WG and members of the panel should be allowed to
participate and to initiate but that is not a must for a WG to form.

> 14. how do you think the membership list should be pratically 
> managed? 
> (today no one knows how it works and how to update data)?

Well in the end, I think it would be better to have a list or a lot of
lists, under the management of the panel, whether all lists should have
certain rules I am not sure off, the personal bickering, the 6 different
people pretending to be 1 and such may be a hassle to content with,
however indeed how many of those will there be when there are thousand
upon thousands who participate in that list? I love my delete button and
my "filter" options, so that should speak for a free for all lits,
however I would want th WG's to have their own list, the panel, and
sub-groups or membergroups and all.
I think that can be easily setup under mailman or a sortlike program,
and I said before I am willing to host that for free, it would in that
setup also allow members to start their own maillist "under" the "main"
list.

> 15. are you a programmer of some sort?

Uhh barely and hardly but supposedly

> 16. do you have a Panel Chair candidate?

Not as long as I do not know who will be on the panel

> 17. what is the most urgent: to get a Panel charter, bylaws, 
> incorporating, 
> deciding a position for the next ICANN meeting, getting a webmaster, 
> establishing polling rules? or what?

Getting this organization organized, so it can represent itself on an
acceptable and respectable bases, anything we do before that is nonsense
as no one takes us serious anyway, let's make sure that when we do make
statements in future we are an organization that sets an example.

> 18. When you motion something are you ready to understake its 
> management 
> right away or do you prefer concepts design?

Both have, depending on the topic and content, an attractive side, and I
think we should leave room for both.

> 19. how will the panel get funded?

As for now the panel members will have to fund themselves, and all
"work" will be "pro bono" (pro deo) we can easily draw upon enough
resources for free to not have to pay anyone, and once we are organized
we can consider means of getting "sponsorship" for travel if needed, by
sending those (panel)members that are closest to whatever it is they
need to attend, cost can be kept at a minimum.

> 20. Is the ICANN of real interest to us? to you? to your 
> country? 

ICANN is of interest on all levels, simply because it exists, however we
feel and think about it, they are an existing entity, and thus of
interest, my personal opinion about it is not as important as the
organizations opinion, suffice it to say that I think ICANN is just
another US Agency trying to run the world.

21. We are dwindling to 950 with the email address 
> getting obsolete. How 
> will you make us 10.000?
> 

By trying to become a real organised organization with well founded
ideas and opinions and participants that hold knowledge which in turn
will  lead to larger participation and more recognition.

Regards

Abel




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