Re: [ICANN-EU] European At Large Council

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>]

On 2000-08-31 03:26:12 +0200, Andy Mueller-Maguhn wrote:

>>1) Should it be a closed group, or an open one?

> As open and decentrally organised as possible, as effectively as
> necessary. There should be at least represantatives from every
> european country and it should be represantatives from
> user-groups, whether voted through at large members or coming
> from existing user groups and forums.

> I think it is important to integrate existing NGOīs who care
> about issues like privacy, citizens + crypto rights etc.

So you're thinking about a group with appointed/elected/whatever
members?  That's essentially what Vittorio had under "closed".

The "open" model would mean "open to the general public".

> I miss one important point: the "european at large council" or
> however it will be called, or the working group to communicate
> and cooperate with the european director should regulary meet in
> REAL LIFE. Mailing lists may be great to keep informed about a
> common project or action but to get people working together we
> need more communication dimensions. So, if this is a PGO or not,
> in my point of view it needs RL-meetings.

I disagree.  I have seen "representative" rounds before, where great
commitments were made at physical meetings, but these commitments
weren't fulfilled.  On the other hand, I've seen mailing lists and
other online forums which get work done nicely and efficiently.

Well, maybe this part is about cultural differences between Bonn and
Berlin... ;-)

> need some sleep now, more thoughts later. i didnīt mention
> transparency and that this should be exemplary to ICANN cause
> someone else did already. It could even be exemplary to the stuff
> happening at the european union...

-- 
Thomas Roessler                         <roessler@does-not-exist.org>