Re: [ga] ICANN reimburse $75,000 to GAC for GAC Secretariat

[Bret Fausett <fausett@lextext.com>]

Marilyn, you don't think it the slightest bit odd that a group constituted
of dozens of representatives of world governments, who purport to speak on
behalf of those governments, can't fund its own secretarial activities, at
least through in-kind donations of time if not from money? I think this
speaks volumes about the legitimacy of the GAC.

     -- Bret 

Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:
> I must disagree, respectively, with any view that this is a bail-out. We are
> all engaged in trying to achieve an effective next stage to ICANN. I am a firm
> believer that the private sector should do what ICANN is doing. Governments
> should be, and are, key advisors. The GAC is a critical resource in this
> aspect. Support of the secretariat for the GAC makes sense.  We are all in
> transition.
> 
> Let's look forward to the future and the common vision which I believe most
> share - we can be bogged down in past experiences. OR we can understand that
> evolution means just that.
> 
> It is hard to put one's personal experiences and to look to a broader more
> common perspective... but that is necessary.  In the future, I believe we have
> agreement to support of staff for SOs ... I have supported that extension to
> Advisory Councils, but noted that I believe that AC's must advise SO's, where
> policy is made, not just Board.
> 
> :-)
> 
> Marilyn
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl Auerbach [mailto:karl@CaveBear.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 7:33 PM
> To: Elisabeth Porteneuve
> Cc: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN reimbourse $75,000 to GAC for GAC Secretariat
> 
> 
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:
> 
>> ICANN reimbourse $75,000 to GAC for 4 month and half
>> of GAC Secretariat (after Bucharest to 15 November 2002):
> 
>> Deux poids deux mesures ?
> 
>> While the DNSO Constituencies provide 90% of the whole ICANN...
> 
> While I may have certain complaints and concerns about the DNSO, the
> effectiveness of its administrative functions is not among them.  I have
> been impressed with the ever-improving mechanisms that the DNSO has put
> into place: e-mail archives, audio recordings of meetings, etc.
> 
> (Had I had the opportunity to do so, I would not have voted for this
> bail-out of the GAC.)
> 
> --karl--
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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
> 
> --
> 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
> 
> 

--
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