Re: [ga] MP3 technical failure - Another "Load"
"Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" wrote:
> I understand "both". .....and I know that in order to move ahead, that
> Thomas and Alex and you, and others in the GA will need to be engaged.
Ok Marilyn, let's have a hear to heart.
It is frustrating to hear that our input is desired and to
_know_ that heretofore our input has been glossed over and
completely ignored. To ask a question and get spin in
return is enough to test anyone's patience, and these fora
are replete with just such instances of non
communication. Many of us are simply tired of knocking on
the deaf person's door...
> I agree that ICANN has significant problems/challenges. It's not easy to be
> heard or to be effective... however, I attended an ITU Plenipot; several
> OECD meetings, WIPO meetings....,many meetings of Parliaments and of US
> Congress...... After that, I can't envision a governmental approach to the
> management of these issues which moves quickly, provides broad consensus
> development and is above nationalist perspectives. avoids government
> encroachment into technical issues of the Internet.
You make a good point here. I too would hate to see
governments in charge, but with the prevailing US
corporate and DoC stranglehold over all things ICANN, it's
pretty difficult to see a difference between the frying
pan or the fire, so to speak.
> I know that many think their voice isn't heard at ICANN - some would be
> amazed that the business community complains about the same issue....
> but...here's our common challenge:
> --in multi lateral organizations, only governments have a voice. You may
> not think ICANN is much better, but I hope you will give it a further
> chance. You can always devolve to governmental oversight.
> And you can work now to make it better.
Many of us have been trying to do so for four years. Case
in point: At the request of others, I assumed the Chair of
the WG Review when Greg Burton did his deed and
mysteriously dropped out, we went on to produce a document
that was not even mentioned on the DNSO web site and was
clearly ignored by all of you in the NC. Instead, Theresa
Swineheart misrepresented the "public input" from the only
WG to ever produce 2! reports... Since that time nothing
has changed in ICANN's methodologies -i.e. give token lip
service to public input and spin whatever angle you
please, citing the thousands of postings on the GA list as
credible input that has been taken into account. When
this changes, perhaps many of us will take it upon
ourselves to start working to "make it better". So, how
do you suggest we proceed?
Hermes Network Inc.
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