[ga] Re: Resignation of Alternate Chair

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

I have taken note of the resignation of our Alternate Chair and can well 
appreciate that which compelled him to take such action.  Patrick has 
provided valuable service to this Assembly, and his contributions were always 
prompted by a desire to raise awareness and to seek consensus in order to 
advance the process constructively.  I thank him for his efforts and look 
forward to his continued input.

We are at a decisive juncture.  There are those among us that argue that the 
sole purpose of the General Assembly is to arrive at consensus on issues, and 
thereby fault the Chair for not more aggressively pursuing consensus 
determinations.  I contend that doggedly pursuing this singleminded objective 
is almost as useless as all those resolutions regularly offered by the NCDNHC 
at each ICANN public forum session... if the consensus determinations of the 
General Assembly are to be  referred back to the Council by the Board, and 
are then subsequently to be ignored by the Council (as are virtually all the 
resolutions of the NCDNHC), then we have achieved absolutely nothing with 
these monumental declarations of GA consensus.  

If our goal is to achieve results -- such as representation for individuals 
-- then the primary issue that we must confront should be the manner by which 
we define our relationship with a Council that has regularly exhibited no 
interest whatsoever in supporting any of our widely-held views.  

One of our most respected members, Roberto Gaetano, our former Chair, 
recently presented his comments to the NC Review Task Force.  In a letter to 
Philip Sheppard, Roberto writes that "none of my objections have been 
reflected in the current draft."  If even the input of our "elder statesman" 
is being cast aside as worthless by the NC Chair, then there is no longer any 
worth in maintaining the facade of a relationship with the Council.  When 
reasonable efforts at cooperation fail, the only remaining recourse is active 
non-cooperation.  

It is time to recognize the Council for what it is, a collection of special 
interest groups that have united to thwart any challenge to their 
self-serving power-clique.  At this very moment they are engaged in 
formulating recommendations that are designed not to facilitate the 
admittance of any new constituency into the DNSO, but rather to place even 
more barriers in the path of those that seek the representation that has 
heretofore been denied.  

The Council may represent the constituencies, but it does not represent those 
of us in the Assembly, nor does it ever intend to do so.   There is only way 
way of dealing with such an adversary, it must decisively be eliminated.  The 
ALSC proposal offers us the opportunity to pursue such a course of action.  
In a structure that calls only for providers, developers, and users, there is 
no room for a DNSO or for a Council to lord over the "rank and file".   
Instead there are opportunities for individuals to finally be 
well-represented in the ICANN process.  It is time to assist the ALSC in the 
formulation of their recommendations and to offer our support.  We have until 
Oct. 26 to provide further input.  

I encourage all of you that believe in the worth of building consensus to 
attempt to do so in an environment that will be more conducive to producing 
results.  An individuals' SO with nine Board seats is certainly the most 
direct path to actualizing such goals.   We have a way out of this morass -- 
let's work to see that such an SO becomes a reality, and that the Council is 
finally placed in the trashbin of history.  

I will ask our Secretariat to initiate a process whereby we may elect a 
replacement Alternate Chair.  Details will follow soon.
--
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