[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] webcasting for DNSO/Santiago Meeting
On 20 July 1999, Michael Sondow <email@example.com> wrote:
>Mark C. Langston a écrit:
>> The DNSO, as an arm of ICANN, has no right whatsoever to ask those
>> least able to pay to shoulder their openness burden to cover this
>> cost when they've spent themselves into a corner.
>> I have no sympathy. There is a mandate that this meeting is open.
>> Meet it, and don't look to those of us who can't afford a subsidized
>> ski junket to cover it.
Before Theresa can bring it up, I will point out that the ICANN bylaws,
Article VI-B, Section 4, subsection (c), state:
(c) The costs of GA meetings shall be the responsibility of the DNSO,
which may levy an equitable, cost-based fee on GA attendees to
recoup those costs. There shall be no other fees required to
participate in the GA.
This meeting is a meeting of ICANN and the DNSO. The GA was not
asked where it would like to meet. The GA had no say in the selection
of such a remote location for this meeting. And unless the DNSO is
planning on removing members of the GA for failure to pay, you
have no power over the GA to demand such a payment.
Until and unless there is some equitable form of representation
for the disenfranchised individuals who have no choice but to be
members of the GA and the GA alone, find other ways to pay for things.
If the GA had any hand in this decision (if the GA *EXISTED* at the
time the meeting location was chosen) the story might be different.
Welcome to your Tea Party.
Mark C. Langston Let your voice be heard:
Systems Admin http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA http://www.dnso.org