Re: [atlarge-discuss] ALAC At-Large Structures

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

Joop and all fellow members,

  You haven't been paying attention again Joop.  I am also registered
to go and may do so.  Also two other IENGroup folks will
also be attending for certain.

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> At 03:21 p.m. 16/06/2003, you wrote:
> >Dear Panel Chairman Joop:
> >
> >Please will you tell the membership which members of the Panel will be
> >representing us at the ICANN Conference in Montreal.
>
> I know only of Sotiris Sotiropoulos going. There may be others who will
> decide at the last moment.
>
> >This organization, or any that cares to admit members (or even one member, I
> >guess) from outside of the geographical boundaries arbitrarily set by ALAC,
> >cannot meet the rules as proposed.  This organization, small and struggling
> >as it may be, already has over a thousand members and probably has members
> >in every one of the ALAC regions.  By the proposed rules, we would have to
> >split into 5 separate groups before ALAC would even consider recognizing us
> >a an @Large organization.
>
> Yes. ALAC will go out of its way to hamstring any emerging global
> organization at birth.
>
> >I note here that Sotiris has offered to present my concerns about this
> >obvious shortcoming of the RALO system at the ALAC meetings, but who will
> >respond on our behalf to the apparent determination by ALAC to dictate which
> >@Large groups it will recognize and which it will simply dismiss as
> >unacceptable by standards that ALAC itself determines?
>
> I am not sure if we need to respond to ICANN on this point. Perhaps not
> responding and continue organizing is the best response.
>
> >  Furthermore, since
> >there appears to already be a vote scheduled for June 26th, at which time
> >the proposals will be ratified
>
> ratified by whom? The Board squatters?
>
> >unless changed due to the receipt of
> >convincing email input over the next 10 days, or a convincing argument at
> >the public forum one day before the vote.
>
> The short convincing argument is: if ICANN is global, the organization of
> its membership must be equally global.
> The question is, who are we trying to convince?
>
> >If a Panel member (or members) is/are to represent our position on these 5
> >proposals, what is that position? Has the Panel discussed the issue?
>
> No.  We are trying to organize ourselves, not ICANN.
> Letting Sotiris read a prepared statement (still to be written) or point to
> the website where such statements can be found is probably the most we can do.
> I'll bring the subject of the "ALAC's at large structures" up in the Panel.
>
> -joop-
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard
===============================================================
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