Re: [ga] Ballot question

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Dear Mr. Svensson,

Always good to see and weigh your point of view.

In my mind the big stumbling block is the By-Laws;

"Section 4. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

    (a) The GA shall be an open forum for participation in the work of the DNSO, and
open to all who are willing to contribute effort to the work of the DNSO. The
participants in the GA should be individuals who have a knowledge of and an interest
in issues pertaining to the areas for which the DNSO has primary responsibility, and
who are willing to contribute time, effort and expertise to the work of the DNSO,
including work item proposal and development, discussion of work items, draft
document preparation, and participation in research and drafting committees and
working groups.

    (b) The GA shall meet at least once a year, if possible in conjunction with
regularly scheduled meetings of the Board. To the maximum extent practicable, all
meetings should be available for online attendance as well as physical attendance.

    (c) The costs of GA meetings shall be the responsibility of the DNSO, which may
levy an equitable, cost-based fee on GA attendees to recoup those costs. There shall
be no other fees required to participate in the GA.

    (d) Participants in the GA shall nominate, pursuant to procedures adopted by the
NC and approved by the Board, persons to serve on the Board in those seats reserved
for the DNSO."


What we can accomplish here, if not actually succeed, is to get a flat position
statement of unwillingness by the NC, BoD and Staff to give any authority to minority
stakeholders.  Timing is essential as this should be brought forward as AL, ccTLD and
IDNO seats are discussed.  I certanly do not expect these folks on boards and
councils and in staff to give up the power and authority they have worked so hard for
easily.  But will they give up enough to keep the angry masses in the GA placated and
going along.  If not what possible claim can they have to bottoms up consensus?

No matter how flawed the current system or the system advanced by this vote, it is
the most bottoms up consensus and transparent body in ICANN and the Internet.

The two elected chair positions are simple regardless of name; External Advocate and
Internal Consensus building.  Both are full time and not necessarily conducive to
each other when advocating or building.

We are at a point where we can no longer afford to lose members by one after
another.  If this does not fly and the GA remains with no impact then I suggest there
will be mass departure and regrouping.

Sincerely,
Eric

--
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