Re: [ga] Ballot discussion

[t byfield <tbyfield@panix.com>]

alexander@svensson.de (Tue 05/14/02 at 05:08 PM +0200):

> (Sorry that we are under such time pressure, but it is due
> to external constraints.)

part of the reason there are such time pressure is that instead of 
taking up motion 1, GA functionaries devoted lots of time to play-
ing bureaucratic cat-and-mouse in order to kill it. that maneuver-
ing was *very* internal.

i've seen lots of blabla in these discussions about how the motion
is beyond the scope of the GA, but the only reason motion 1 is im-
portant is that ICANN itself has moved well beyond *its* scope. it
is absolutely within the scope of the GA to address that fact--and
not, as you would have it, with a bunch of banal observations that
no one will listen to but, rather, with a statement that may *pre-
vent* ICANN from claiming consensus to justify further expansion.

cheers,
t
--
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