[ga-abuse] Re: [ga] Blending Top-down and Bottoms-up

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

I HAVE FOUND ONLY THE AUTHORITY OF THE LIST MONITORS TO STOP THIS BEHAVIOR


Somebody stop this behavior it is astonishing.  This man advocates on a dayley
basis the violation of our rules and charter, worse he implements them.  This is
intolerable. If I directed you any further I would do you a disservice
http://www.dnso.icann.org/ please somebody find any authority for this man to
act in any official capacity outside what he is given in the absence of our
chair.  I beg our monitors to put a stop to this now!!

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Jun 2001 16:29:19 -0400, Danny Younger wrote:
> Subject: [ga] Blending Top-down and Bottoms-up
>
> > The new lists are admittedly an experiment.  Let's experiment a little
> > longer to see if we can achieve meaningful results.  One of the major
> > issues that we must confront is the inevitable restructuring of ICANN . .
> .
> >
> > It is my hope that this group can elect their own Chair, establish
> > Terms-of Reference, Timelines, and collect sufficient background
> > documents to rapidly educate those of us new to the process.
>
> Members, GA Assembly
>
> I think it should be clear by now that Danny issues pronouncements
> without effective consultation with me or others.  I am sorry if this
> appears divisive.
>
> I have asked almost all of the people nominated below, both privately and
> onlist, if they would volunteer their services as a sub-group Chair.  From
> memory, one person ignored the request and the others declined.  I do not
> expect a significant turnaround.
>
> Personally, I think the formation of sub-groups is the only effective way
> that the GA can operate.  As you all know, I have tried without much success
> to promote their use.  My view, as I've said publicly and privately, is that
> there are too many sublists.  Many people have found the situation a little
> confusing and I have tried to help where I can.
>
> The current problem arose for three reasons.  One was that Danny created a
> sublist [ga-review] without the support of the wg-review participants.  He
> then disagreed with my request to use [ga-icann] for postings relating to
> the restructuring of ICANN.  He sees that [ga-review] is more appropriate.
> However, its "terms of reference" clearly show its purpose as the
> restructuring of the DNSO and not ICANN as a whole,
>
> The last reason was that somebody, perhaps the DNSO Secretariat, created
> another mailing list for issues relating to .org.  We really do have to
> consider the scope and viability of these lists.  I would therefore repeat
> my earlier comments:
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2001 16:02:30 +1000, I wrote:
> Subject: GA-REVIEW & Other Mailing Lists
>
> > In other words, I don't care very much how the work is allocated between
> > lists but, for each list, whether it is viable and, if so, what purpose it
> > will serve.  Unless we address that issue the lists will not be very
> > effective as a tool for policy formulation.
> >
> > Personally I think seven sublists is too many.  I would value input from
> > the list members in relation to how they see the system working most
> > effectively.
>
> Perhaps I should clarify that I am referring to the whole system including
> working groups, terms of reference et al.  This has all been discussed in my
> previous postings.  I will repost one that I made to [ga-rules] on 2 June.
>
> My view is that we need a bit less top-down and a bit more bottom-up !!
>

This is hypocrosy!!   How can he advocate the overthrow of our chair as the
Alternate-chair and claim bottoms-up??

>
> Best regards
> Patrick Corliss
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html