Re: [ICANN-EU] European At Large Council

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

On 2000-09-06 17:09:00 +0200, Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> IMHO Alf's question boils down to: does that list is the @large
> Europan organization seed or something different.

I'd express it differently: Alf starts looking at the other end of
the tunnel.  He asks: What should an at large council look like,
what are the goals, and what's the most efficient way for such a
council to influence decisions?

He is certainly right that structured output which can be presented
to all the directors is a good way to do this.

Obviously, such a structure can be set up with ICANN's help, and
organizatorial means: For instance, ICANN could start setting up
open discussion lists for at large members, they could start holding
elections to create a council, and whatnot.  However, I don't see
such a structure emerge any time soon, given that ICANN doesn't seem
to have a clear idea about the @large membership's future role.

Alf: Please correct me if I'm wrong.


Others (including myself) have been arguing from what we have: A
mailing list with some members, lots of them running for
endorsements, others having been nominated by NomCom, and still
others just being "general public".

My hope is that we manage to extend the membership of this list, and
facilitate a dialog within the interested parts of the ICANN at
large membership, and the public.  I hope that this dialog may at
some point evolve into some kind of structure, possibly with the
director as a germ of condensation, possibly by functioning as an
argument-creation machine which generates input for the board of
directors.  Or, possibly, as something much more strange than we
currently imagine.

> I think this list does exist and works well. It is organized
> around Candidates with critcal opinions about ICANN (the word
> used by Ester Dyson describing her future role, so no offence
> intended). We agreed it was to support the European no-NomCom
> Director.

Sorry, but I don't see this.  While this list was certainly created
to help find reasonable candiates for member-nomination (which
wasn't necessary, looking at the numbers ;-), I don't believe this
list should have the goal to exclusively provide input to either
Andy or Jeannette.  And I oppose to the idea that "this list" should
produce any kind of recommendation for the election.  (Technically,
it can't.)

> IMHO the @large european organization is something different. To
> be efficient (?) or buried in innefficiency (?), it should be a
> part of the ICANN structure, as defined in the by laws and
> described by Alf. Several people expressed the opinion that ICANN
> will eventually make its Membership paying (it makes sense).

There's no contradiction between the two approaches.  As I said in
the suggestion for the new charter, this list could be considered to
be a _germ_ for a future structure.  This structure may at some
point grow into an ICANN-sponsored bureaucracy, or it may evolve
into something completely different - including a place where only
megalomanic lunatics meet.  See above.

> If I consider the icann-france@egroups.com ML, it was not set
> up to work within the ICANN and obviously not to support a
> French. We understand it as part of the icann-europe ML, in
> support of Andy or Jeannette or (if none was elected) in
> support the consensus on icann-europe ML will favor.

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