Re: [icann-eu] LAST CALL: Study Committee Comments.

[Vittorio Bertola <vb@vitaminic.net>]

On Thu, 30 Nov 2000 21:56:17 +0100, you wrote:

>there seems to be a large consensus that some kind of at large
>advisory council should be created.  Such a council could, for
>instance, be used to elect part of the directors.

I'd be very, very careful in advancing such thesis. We have already been
accused of being "membership-squatters", a bunch of self-nominated persons
who are trying to hijack the membership and claim their representativity
without basis. Trying to revert the direct election approach would easily
create open and wide opposition inside the membership to our effort, which
is the last thing we can afford.

I'd stay with the point that all nine Directors must be elected by the
membership, period. I can't see how admitting an indirect election could
help our cause now.

I'd also say, more generally speaking, that we must show that we want to
serve the membership, and not the opposite. This is also one of the reasons
why I proposed to state that any conclusions drawn from the Study should be
subject to a direct, general consultory vote among the membership, which
should not bind the actions of the Board, but should make it clear whether
any action that could be taken by the Board has or does not have consensus
among the At Large community. Again, I think that it would be very difficult
for the Board, from the point of view of public relations, to take decisions
such as the elimination of some or all At Large Directors if it is clearly
proven that the Internet community is against them. The only real strength
we have is the number and variety of our members - so let's use it to defend
ourselves.

I didn't get whether other people (except you, Thomas) agreed or disagreed
with this point, so I'd like to get a wider feedback on this.
-- 
.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo vb.
Vittorio Bertola     <vb@vitaminic.net>    Ph. +39 011 23381220
Vitaminic [The Music Evolution] - Vice President for Technology