[ga] Who reigns ABOVE ICANN?

[Harold Whiting <Harold@PeterWhiting.com>]

At 03:26 PM 3/19/2002 -0800, Mike Roberts wrote:

<snip>
So let's not assume one way or the other that elements of the plan are cast
in concrete until the Board actually proposes changes to the bylaws and
posts them for public comment as they are required to do.
</snip>

Comment which they will likely ignore, as always.

<snip>
The direct election option is gone, regardless of our individual opinions
of its fairness, cost, etc.
</snip>

Really?
Not only is the election gone, but the OPTION is gone as well?

Isn't this in direct violation of the contracts with the DoC?

Sorry, but I am having a very difficult time stomaching the idea that the
current management/Board of ICANN indicates absolutely no concern for any
"botom up" process, instead deciding that they have unlimited authority to
do what they want.  Why abide by the bylaws if you can "change" them at will?  

ICANN, I have heard you message loud and clear; "We will not operate in a
manner responsible to anyone but ourselves. We are an untouchable,
autonomous entity that is soley interested in growing our own Corporation's
income.  We will not allow the public, which we supposedly serve the
interests of, to have any say in the matter"

The arrogance of it all is simply astounding.  Since ICANN refuses to "see
the forrest through the trees", perhaps USG intervention IS neccessary.
Senators actually listen to thier constituents.  I, for one, plan on being
heard.

"We don't like the bylaws that were created to comply with the mandate of
our contractual obligation to the DoC, so we are going to just change it"

I'm not going for it.
I doubt Congress is going to go for it either...  

Mike, Stuart, Vint, et al; Wecome to the food chain. You are NOT at the top. 

--HJW--
Harold Whiting
--
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