[ga] NC Review Task Force -- Captured by Business Interests ??

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

Ross,

If I may ask a question... you speak of rough consensus and running code.  
The GA has already arrived at consensus regarding the need to immediately 
establish an individuals constituency and the need to restructure the DNSO.  
Now that such determinations have been made by this Assembly, how would your 
running code analogy bring these propositions to fruition?

There is no value in arriving at consensus just for the sake of stating that 
we have arrived at consensus.  The Non-Com's routinely arrive at consensus 
within their constituency and present resolutions at every plenary session.  
It gets them nowhere, as they are ignored by both the Council and the Board, 
as is the GA.

You argue that "I haven't heard anyone state that individuals don't need 
meaningful representation within ICANN".  That may be true, but no 
constituency other than the non-coms has gone on record as actually 
supporting an individuals constituency (and that includes your constituency). 
 Has any constituency articulated that they believe in the principle 
articulated by both the ALSC and the Board that representation must accompany 
participation?  If so, they would be arguing for representational rights for 
the GA that enjoys no voting power within the DNSO.

Instead a concerted effort has been made to both deny representative rights 
to individuals and to prevent GA members from fully participating in the 
substantive work of the DNSO.  Open working groups do not exist under the 
current Council regime.   Tell me how your running code attends to these 
issues.

--
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