Re: [council] Internal Matters and NC's responsibility
Agree with you YJ.
Just for clarify:
1. A constituency member sent a valid complain
2. A Names Council member from such a constituency instead of propose
something contructive, for example, an offering to review our
procedures, what tried to do was to disenfranchise in the Names Council
list the credibility of such a person, who, by the way is a person
that colaborated very near in several works and research regarding DNS
and is a respetable person amongst the ones who works about
technical issues of the DNS.
3. I simply tried to clarify to Names Council members about itand
defend his right to express his impressions (as anyone has the right to
4. I received in this public list attacks of one fellow of my own
constituency and misinformed other Names Council members
about certain proposals posted by me in MdR face to face meeting
5. So I ansewered in my defense and supported with documents the real
facts about such issues that such fellow Names Council member
brought to the attention to our other Names Council fellows.
I really invite to you YJ and Milton together with the AdCom and in with
our NCDNHC members to engage in review our procedures in our to achieve
the best way to assure that all the work developed in the Names Council
by us be really the will of the constituency members, meaning the will
of the majority of 184 members (or whatever be the total number of
> YJ Park wrote:
> Fellow councillors,
> Firstly, as one of NCDNHC AdCom member, I do
> feel sorry for and responsible for drawing your attentions
> to NCDNHC's parts of arguments.
> As Louis explained, first of all, this should not have
> been brought to the Names Council for the discussion.
> Secondly, I want to ask you to join encouraging Milton
> to continue his enormosuly challenging task with unseen
> deadline under supports from fellow NC members who
> requested Milton to lead this ORG task force as a chair.
> As it was indicated Milton has been devoting even his
> holidays to .ORG task force so as to build a consensus,
> which is not a easy job at all.
> Thirdly, Vany, can I get your generous understanding
> and agreement as one of AdCom member that we,
> NCDNHC AdCom members go back to our own
> constituency to solve this internal matter before we
> come to NC?
> Taking this opportunity, I want to inform that NCDNHC has
> been trying to achieve a consensus despite its cultural and
> geographical diversities and to secure the equal voices
> among the members, which is not easy at all. i.e. at least
> 30 members from each region, very even structure.
> Lastly, I would like to ask NC to ponder over the updated
> .ORG task force's draft version 5.2 before NC teleconference
> on Jan 17.
> Thank you for your cooperation in advance,
Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales, BSEE
Information Technology Specialist
Sustainable Development Networking Programme/Panama
Member of the ICANN's DNSO Non-Commercial Constituency
Tel: (507) 317-0169
Are you a Non-Commercial organization and have a domain name?
Join the ICANN's DNSO Non-Commercial Constituency, ncdnhc.icann-ncc.org