Re: [ga] Statement on Completion of "A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS" (ICP-3)

[Eric Dierker <eric@HI-TEK.COM>]

No Mr. Stubbs,

Right or Wrong, Good of Bad that happens to be my Chair.  We did not pick a
procedural guru to lead us.  We picked a GOOD MAN.  I am sure that he presented the
GA position.  He stood back and weighed  Impact and greed and he put my dotcomoners
above your corporate interests and reported accordingly.  Our frustration in our
procedural matters should not be seen as weakness, but rather strength.  I am sure
that those who battle over procedure would rally over an attack on the BoD position
as supported by Sims.

This is not an issue it is abuse of the users.  If I am not mistaken you and Mr.
Crispin are in favor of letting the Staff write all policy issues.  If I am wrong
please correct me. I look forward to an explanation and thank you for your input.

Sincerely,

ken stubbs wrote:

> interesting to note that the ga chairman (mr younger) chooses only to present on
> side of this issue.
>
> ken stubbs
>
> DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
>
> > Milton Mueller's first comments on Stuart Lynn's revised draft, and the need
> > for a working group:
> >
> > Fellow Name Council members:
> >
> > Whatever one's opinion of this document's substance,
> > it is a completely illegitimate exercise. The staff has no
> > authority to unilaterally declare that something is a policy.
> >
> > Policy in this matter is quite explicitly the purview of the
> > DNSO, according to corporate articles and bylaws.
> >
> > I would like to know on what basis ICANN staff decided to
> > completely bypass its own DNSO in drafting this so-called
> > policy.
> >
> > This document was not even voted on by the ICANN Board.
> >
> > What makes this all the more egregious is that if ICANN
> > management had respect for its own processes, it would
> > probably get something very like the same policy through
> > the DNSO. My own dissenting views are (probably) in the
> > minority at this point. But apparently staff are so
> > fearful that its made-up policies cannot stand up to the
> > light of open discussion in a neutral forum that it has to
> > bypass any process at all.
> >
> > Why are you afraid of open debate and discussion of this
> > issue in a working group? Do you lack confidence in the merit
> > of your ideas?
> >
> > Milton Mueller
> >
> > -------------------
> > Perhaps Milton can also elaborate on why the Names Council chose to reverse
> > its decision and to declare this topic to be beyond the scope of the DNSO.
> > Mr. Lynn's draft may be read at
> > http://www.icann.org/icp/icp-3-background/lynn-statement-09jul01.htm
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html