RE: [ICANN-EU] Re: European At Large Council

["McMeikan, Andrew" <andrew.mcmeikan@mitswa.com.au>]

There is the start of a framework at
http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?InternetGovernance it is non-exclusive and you
are free to go there and say that you disapprove, I would rather you go
there and help fill it out :)

Life is an experiment, invest 60 seconds looking it over I doubt that you
can resist changing it.

	cya,	Andrew...

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Jeanette Hofmann [SMTP:jeanette@medea.wz-berlin.de]
> Sent:	Friday, September 01, 2000 8:02 AM
> To:	Thomas Roessler
> Cc:	icann-europe@fitug.de
> Subject:	Re: [ICANN-EU] Re: European At Large Council
> 
> 
> > > Yes but it should be manageable otherwise the director will spend most
> > > of his energies in trying to understand what is the concern rather
> > > than trying to find a solution for such concern. 
> 
> He shouldn't do this on his own anyway ;-)
> 
> > If your main concern is about ressources needed to follow
> > discussions, and mere monitoring of tendencies, there's no real need for
> > elections and the like - I'd rather expect that the structures needed
> > will naturally evolve.
> 
> I agree. I've pondered the concept of an at-large council today. Here 
> is the provisional result:
> Any form of council would imply that only a limited number of people 
> is honored with joining the club. 
> So far, I've found none of the suggested selections procedures 
> convincing. On the contrary, none of them seems really up to the 
> tasks we have to deal with. 
> (Personally, I don't care at all about a member's nationality, I do care, 
> however, about commitment, competence, communication skills and 
> so on. How would we know if these merits are equally distributed 
> among the council members chosen?)
> What is more, I don't see that we were able to produce anything near 
> a "rough consensus" on the selection mechanism. We would probably 
> spend precious time and energy on debating endlessly the various 
> advantages and disadvantages of the various ways at hand to truely 
> represent the members' will. 
> One potential outcome would be that we thereby lose a lot of frustrated 
> people on the way. Another that we'll be more concerned about self-
> organization and mere survival than about ICANN related issues. 
> 
> Thus, I think time is not ready for creating a council. An at-large 
> council may be a gradual outcome of an undefined period of 
> discussion and work. A council whose authority would be based on 
> pesonal trust and merit rather than on formal and somewhat helpless 
> criteria of representativeness.  
> That's why I would prefer to rely on open mailing lists for the time 
> being. 
> And, to add just another point, a council wouldn't prevent a director 
> from creating his own private little council - and be it only to figure
> out 
> how to cope with its official equivalent ;-) 
>  
> Comments?
> 
> jeanette
> 
The information transmitted is intended for the person or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, copying or other 
use of, or taking any action in reliance upon, this information by 
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If 
you have received this in error, please contact the sender and delete 
the material from your system. Utility Services Corporation (USC) is not 
responsible for any changes made to the material other than those made 
by USC or for the effect of the changes on the material’s meaning.