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

[lutz@iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)]

* Griffini Giorgio wrote:
> I still prefer the 'positive' consensus method (raising hand or say an
> explicit "Yes,I agree" on a list) because it is more transparent and safe
> and also I have also in other places seen 'non-dissenting opinion' method
> applied in a completely unfair manner.

I've worked with both methods. A larger list requires the default 'Yes, I
commit', despite a small list with a limited number of members. Both methods
work fine, but the latter one provides a stronger consensus.

>> The question is whehter and how these boundaries influence
>> ICANN-relevant topics.

> I think that differences about sensibility on social impact of ICANN
> decisions and national pride concerns and their side-effects will be the
> most noticeable ones.

Yes, there are cultural differences causing different answers to ICANN
related questions. It is necessary to notice and deal with it. (German
prefer a regulated solution, Swiss a democratic one with a very conservative
default, ...)

>> The best way to attack the representativity argument is, in my humble
>> opinion, to make the process open for all, and try to record the
>> differing opinions. But I wrote that before, you remember?

> Yes but in this uncoordinated effort to build up a body how can we be
> sure we will not miss some opinions? When we will have a 'sort of '
> initial body we can charter it to measure representativeness by
> 'positive' consensus gained by open access and public readability.

The other point is: Who really wants a representative director?
While reading Yellow Press I doubt that a truely representative person will
be able to do what's necessary.