Re: [ga] Who wants "governance" without "representation?"
I agree with Vint that once elected to the board, the directors should take
the broader view. That does not mean, of course, that everyone will see the
same broader view. And I don't think Vint is saying this either. Who
chooses the board is still the topic of the day, and one that the current
board is asking to control, without much outside influence. Vint seems to
be saying (correct me if wrong) that everything is still on the table,
including extending terms of existing elected members and accepting seats on
the board from the new at large organization, once the thing is actually
organized. He also seems to be saying that also on the table are all of the
other alternatives, including Lynn's proposals. What is not encouraging
from the Accra meeting is the thin evidence of incumbent board member
support for elected board members. Not even all of the elected board
members support this, and none of the non-elected ones seem vocal in support
of elections. To Esther's credit, as a non-board member who actually gave
up her seat, she pushed for elections in Accra.
One question I would put to Vint concerns proposals for a rebid of the
DOC/ICANN contract. Since Lynn and some board members want to scrap the
orginal deal, and propose something so radically different, would he support
a rebid on the DOC contract, to allow other visions of ICANN to compete on a
level playing field? This is a serious question, and one that I believe
ICANN board members could support, if confident of the benefits and appeal
of their own ideas and proposals. Or, put another way, should ICANN spent
its money to fight such a rebid, through expenditures on lobbyists, PR
agents and lawyers, if one is proposed?
----- Original Message -----
From: "vint cerf" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Dan Steinberg" <email@example.com>
Cc: "Mike Roberts" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>; "Eric Weisberg"
<firstname.lastname@example.org>; "James Love" <email@example.com>
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Who wants "governance" without "representation?"
> not sure this is quantifiable as much as it is to feel fiduciary
> responsibility to all users of the Internet, providers, vendors of
> hardware and software, in the areas for which ICANN has policy
> responsibility. Trying to balance the wide range of interests seems
> more responsible than taking a narrow perspective based on the
> "origin" of a board seat. that does not mean to neglect the portion
> of the community from which a board seat emanates but rather to
> treat that segment with equal respect as the others.
> At 01:54 PM 3/18/2002 -0500, Dan Steinberg wrote:
> >ummmmm in the interest of developing some concepts about structure, how
does one quantify and/or measure this 'holistic sense'?
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html