Re: [ga] Input needed
Danny and all assembly members,
The ICANN BOD and staff have known about other options
from the beginning. Many have been put forth. Most of them
were before you were actively involved in the process however.
Perhaps some more in-depth research into the archives of various
forum venues would be a good exercise for you to again
delve into in more depth. For instance the archives of the
Comments@icann.org and firstname.lastname@example.org would be
very good starting areas.
In addition the Structure TF was a closed effort. As such
ideas could not be articulated or provided in a transparent
fashion. Given that, it is difficult to adequately provide for
different alternatives in any meaningful manner. This is one
reason why we [INEGroup] were very adamant about having
WG's (Working Groups] Within the GA and other forums
so as to facilitate a much more consensus (Measured of course
by voting) based process. Again, without good process,
no good product can be the result. This is an axiom of good
management and anyone that has been involved in management
technique know instinctively or by experience..
Just today though Danny another alternative is being floated,
for example. I have only done a quick read and it is lacking some
practical and process details that need to be delineated more specifically.
But overall it looks pretty fair.. One must understand that this is
and Essay however...
So Danny, in conclusion other approaches to the restructuring of
ICANN, the SO's and other specific areas of ICANN have been
delineated in great detail on a number of occasions from a
fairly diverse number of interested parties or groups. It is just
that the ICANN BOD and staff have ignored them for reasons
yet to be known....
> M. Stuart Lynn has put forward a restructuring plan. While I vehemently
> oppose his particular plan, I find myself asking, "What other overall
> restructuring plans have been put forth that the Board is in a position to
> Frankly, I haven't seen many, have you?
> At the Marina del Rey session the Board resolved [01.132] that a Committee of
> the Board is hereby established, to be known as the Committee on
> Restructuring, to monitor and provide reports to the Board on these issues,
> and to evaluate and make recommendations to the Board concerning any specific
> proposals or applications to the Board that would or could affect the
> structure of ICANN or the composition of the Board.
> So far, how have we as members of the General Assembly contributed to solving
> the organizational/structural issues that the ICANN faces? We're great at
> "reacting" to the proposals of others, but where are our own proposals or
> counter-proposals that the Committee on Restructuring could evaluate?
> David Farrar has done a valiant job within the Council's Structure TF
> attempting to represent our views, but candidly, we haven't given him much to
> work with, have we?
> Our time is severely limited as the Accra session is almost upon us. If
> anyone has any thoughts as to how the ICANN could better be designed, now is
> the time to speak... otherwise, feel free to accept the consequences of Board
> action. The continued existence of the GA and the DNSO is at risk.
> Give the Board another option, or kiss it all goodbye.
> This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
> Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
Contact Number: 972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html