Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1079
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Wednesday, March 13 2002          Volume 01 : Number 1079

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 21:34:48 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] here we go...

Oh please forgive me SS,

But let me respond to this neophyte of political restraint.

1.    One Gov. dictating use of the net against 99% of all others is bad.
2.    Restrictions based solely upon the use of the net is bad. (you can do
this off the net but on it is illegal?)
3.    Extending Bobby Kennedy's use of the "wire" to stop the gangster's
sports betting is way wrong.
4.    Freedom of speech on the net should not me dictated by one conservative
Republican Rep. out of Virginia.

Irregardless of ICANN's inneficacy, until the mold is broken Congress or
whatever group should stay out of regulating our internet.

What the latest FTC ruling and WIPO should teach us is that government control
of our net should be confined to common law notions of right and wrong, and
they should stay the heck out of the business of trying to understand the
likes of you.

Peace be upon all of you, let your children rest well in the knowledge that
you will protect them.

Eric

William X Walsh wrote:

> Can someone explain to me how this has any relevance to the GA,
> besides contributing to the list pollution (such as all the alt.root
> talk on this list the last few days).
>
> Tuesday, Tuesday, March 12, 2002, 11:12:21 PM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>
> > The Sherrif's in town folks, and things just went from bad
> > to worse.
>
> > House panel approves Net gambling ban...
>
> > http://news.com.com/2100-1023-858458.html
>
> > Here's a priceless quote from this deeply disturbing
> > article, make of it what you will:
>
> > "This legislation is badly needed because there are a
> > great many offshore sites that are sucking billions of
> > dollars from American households," said Rep. Bob
> > Goodlatte, R-Va., who sponsored the bill."
>
> > I suppose the next thing the US Government will ban is
> > travel abroad for its citizens.  It's the logical
> > conclusion after this absurdity, after all, US tourism
> > abroad is liable to "suck billions of dollars from
> > American households"...
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> --
>
> "There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
> the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
> interprets the truth."
> -- Jean Giradoux
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] 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 [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 22:09:03 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] here we go...

Again, none of this has the least little bit to do with the ICANN, or
the DNSO-GA, or any area under its area of interest.

As such it is just more list pollution.

Tuesday, Tuesday, March 12, 2002, 9:34:48 PM, Eric Dierker wrote:

> Oh please forgive me SS,

> But let me respond to this neophyte of political restraint.

> 1.    One Gov. dictating use of the net against 99% of all others is bad.
> 2.    Restrictions based solely upon the use of the net is bad. (you can do
> this off the net but on it is illegal?)
> 3.    Extending Bobby Kennedy's use of the "wire" to stop the gangster's
> sports betting is way wrong.
> 4.    Freedom of speech on the net should not me dictated by one conservative
> Republican Rep. out of Virginia.

> Irregardless of ICANN's inneficacy, until the mold is broken Congress or
> whatever group should stay out of regulating our internet.

> What the latest FTC ruling and WIPO should teach us is that government control
> of our net should be confined to common law notions of right and wrong, and
> they should stay the heck out of the business of trying to understand the
> likes of you.

> Peace be upon all of you, let your children rest well in the knowledge that
> you will protect them.

> Eric

> William X Walsh wrote:

>> Can someone explain to me how this has any relevance to the GA,
>> besides contributing to the list pollution (such as all the alt.root
>> talk on this list the last few days).
>>
>> Tuesday, Tuesday, March 12, 2002, 11:12:21 PM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>>
>> > The Sherrif's in town folks, and things just went from bad
>> > to worse.
>>
>> > House panel approves Net gambling ban...
>>
>> > http://news.com.com/2100-1023-858458.html
>>
>> > Here's a priceless quote from this deeply disturbing
>> > article, make of it what you will:
>>
>> > "This legislation is badly needed because there are a
>> > great many offshore sites that are sucking billions of
>> > dollars from American households," said Rep. Bob
>> > Goodlatte, R-Va., who sponsored the bill."
>>
>> > I suppose the next thing the US Government will ban is
>> > travel abroad for its citizens.  It's the logical
>> > conclusion after this absurdity, after all, US tourism
>> > abroad is liable to "suck billions of dollars from
>> > American households"...
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
>> --
>>
>> "There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
>> the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
>> interprets the truth."
>> -- Jean Giradoux
>>
>> --
>> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>> Send mail to [email-masked] 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 [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --

"There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
interprets the truth."
- -- Jean Giradoux

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 19:25:41 +1300
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

All this in about 12 days.

GA members should spread the word. There are no ready funds yet to finance 
an outreach campaign. Only $16.900 in pledges.

First elections will be announced as soon as the supervisory Panel agrees 
on the details. Nominations can already start now. See 
www.icannatlarge.com/forum/

- --Joop

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:28:23 +0100
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] GA meeting in Accra and remote participation

Alex,
Glad you made it to Accra.
I came back yesterday after long absence, and caught up with the backlog.
I was surprised and puzzled about the disappearance of one major item from 
ICANN's agenda in these last times, and sent therefore the question shown 
below.
Please push it through, if you think that this objective should still be 
within the scope of ICANN.
Best regards
Roberto

- --------------- start question ---------------

Good morning.

"What happened to the objective of deploying new gTLDs, which was one of the 
main reasons why all this jazz started?"

Thanks
Roberto Gaetano

- --------------- end question ---------------

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 01:56:53 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

Joop and all assembly members,

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> All this in about 12 days.

  Easy can do Joop.  But it requires WORK on your and Pinders part.
So get after it!

>
>
> GA members should spread the word. There are no ready funds yet to finance
> an outreach campaign. Only $16.900 in pledges.

  As has been pointed out to you on the ALSC list Joop, first for
pledges to have any effect you first must have and account set up.
That has been offered, but no response.  So, either you or
Pinder will need to get this done ASAP.

>
>
> First elections will be announced as soon as the supervisory Panel agrees
> on the details. Nominations can already start now. See
> www.icannatlarge.com/forum/

  Webmail as also been pointed out to you is nearly useless to
"Spread the Word".  So it would be better to do so on the
AtlargeForum.org mailing list.  It would also be helpful, as also
has been pointed out several times to you Joop, that ICANNATLARGE.COM
get a majordomo mailing list up ASAP...  And by the way fellow
GA members, this too was offered FREE but Joop saw fit to
deny it was even though it has been documented in the Atlargeforum.org
archives.

>
> --Joop
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 03:02:28 -0500
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Numbers - was [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Joop
Teernstra
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 1:26 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

All this in about 12 days.

GA members should spread the word. There are no ready funds yet to finance
an outreach campaign. Only $16.900 in pledges.

First elections will be announced as soon as the supervisory Panel agrees
on the details. Nominations can already start now. See
www.icannatlarge.com/forum/

- --Joop

Look Joop,
I object to these elections. Please pass this on to the "supervisory panel",
whatever that is and wherever that is. The priority for this At Large cannot
possibly be selecting a "Supervisory panel" or "editorial committee" for the
website or whatever the label is, when it is blindingly obvious what is
driving the site in the current climate, and it has nothing do with any
function that can be performed by a committee. It's all about *Numbers*.

Right now, the website is functioning more or less as a public news service,
(or ought to be) in that it seeks to confirm *numbers of public interested*
in the At Large and more than anything else, to undertake outreach and
*increase numbers* while performing a community service by offering a forum
to self-organize into groups so that a *number of stakeholder groups* can be
determined to exist. We don't need a committee to set that agenda - it is
already known. News programs are not run by committee. A departmental head
directs and manages other teams from the top down, delegating significant
powers to those teams who uncover key stories from the bottom to the surface
where the editor ensures they are aired.

The present climate is one of rapid change and as such, requires the GA, At
Large and all Constituencies to think on their feet, something that is not
possible if every decision has to go through a committee. The At large has
tremendous advantage over the NC, the GA, the IDNO, in that it is *not*
burdened by committees and structures.  Why replicate failure?

If anything is needed for the At Large website, it is *one* person - an
Editor, with communication skills to oversee the technical function of
webmaster, somebody with at least a credible amount of experience in public
service media, to ensure effective communication levels and balanced
coverage for minorities. That's all.

This Editor's core task is to attract *numbers*, and to encourage productive
use of the forum to self-organize into like minded groups, whether that is
domain name holders, non-domain name holders, regional assemblies, alternate
root users, offshore casino owners anonymous, or whatever. At the moment,
that is being hindered by a home page that does not point out that it is
necessary to sign up to the forum separately in order to communicate or
self-organize with other members, neither does it describe what the forum
can offer. Members have no way of even knowing which members are in their
region because no State/ County information is given, neither do they know
whether any announcements of efforts to self organize will be announced
through that list.

These are fundamental problems in communication with your public that can be
addressed by an Editor that knows what they're doing. They are observations,
not criticisms that I use to illustrate the point that you don't need an
elaborate series of elections to achieve what is necessary - particularly
when it aims to form a committee of amateurs who, with the best will in the
world, do not have the experience between them to replace one good Editor
with a track record.

Regards,
Joanna

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 02:06:15 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] ICANNATLARGE.COM - Nominations for website supervisory Panel? - What about the Steering committee Joop-Pinder

All assembly members,

  Seems that KING Joop and Jester Pinder, are again missing the point
or aren't listening very well. (See below following comments) 

  Joop, what HAS been called for it a Steering Committee election first.
Once a Legitimate Steering committee is elected and in place,
the members can amongst themselves either hire, or amongst themselves
act in the capacity as a "Web site Supervisory Panel" as part of their
duties or function.  Pretty simple and streamlines process as well
as gives the Steering Committee a function that can be seen
by everyone.  >;)

  It would also seem obvious to many here that from your list
of YOUR choice of Potential Candidates that few have the
ability or experience to carry out such a function.
A few have admitted that they are not Domain Name
holders, and likely have NO experience for such a 
function...

  The following is a copy from ICANNATLARGE.COM
Webmail Topic: Nominations
Also see: http://icannatlarge.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=175#175
And follow on comments:
http://icannatlarge.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=189#189

===============  Copy starts here ===============

  Nominations for website supervisory Panel
  ICANN at Large Discussion Forum Index -> NOMINATIONS
 Author: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>

  Message
  terastra
  Joined: 25 Feb 2002
  Posts: 51
  Location: New Zealand
  Posted: Sun Mar 10, 2002 1:08 am
  Post subject: Nominations for website supervisory Panel

 Looking at the choice that we now have in our growing members list
(454)

 My early choice of Nominations (I like a large list so that
seconders have plenty of choice) would be

                       Karl Auerbach
                       Pindar Wong
                       Esther Dyson
                       Thomas Roessler
                       Alexander Svennson
                       Bret Faucett
                       Izumi Aizu
                       Michael Froomkin (is he a member yet?)
                       Vittorio Bertola
                       Jeanette Hoffmann
                       Danny Younger (should be persuaded to join again)
                       Joanna Lane
                       Hans Klein
                       David Johnson
                       Charles Cha'ban
                       Bill Lovell
                       Stefaan Verhulst
                       Wolfgang Kleinwaechter
                       Johannes Chiang
                       Veni Markovski
                       Roeland Meyer
                       Chris Streatfield
                       Sotiris Sotiropoulos
                       Bill Lovell
                       Andy Mueller-Maguehn
                       Masanobu Katoh
                       Asaad Al-Najjar

   I'll think of more names.

   Can we have some debate on what you all think would
be the optimum number for this Panel? It is not a steeting committee,
but simply a broad body that is to look after your website content and
 structure.
 7?
    _________________
   temporary webmaster

=================  End of copy ==============

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 00:23:33 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Numbers - was [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

Wednesday, Wednesday, March 13, 2002, 12:02:28 AM, Joanna Lane wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Joop
> Teernstra
> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 1:26 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

> All this in about 12 days.

> GA members should spread the word. There are no ready funds yet to finance
> an outreach campaign. Only $16.900 in pledges.

> First elections will be announced as soon as the supervisory Panel agrees
> on the details. Nominations can already start now. See
> www.icannatlarge.com/forum/

> --Joop

> Look Joop,
> I object to these elections. Please pass this on to the "supervisory panel",
> whatever that is and wherever that is. The priority for this At Large cannot

I warned you off list when this thing started Joanna, how it would end
up.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --

"There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
interprets the truth."
- -- Jean Giradoux

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:00:58 +0000
From: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Organizing structure work.

Dear all,

as those who watched the NC webcast will have see, the NC
did not pass the resolution drafted by NC representatives 
in the Structure TF. Instead of working within the 
Structure TF, the NC wants to work via email and
weekly teleconferences for the next six weeks. The 
GA Chair and Alt. Chair have been asked to devise input 
mechanisms so that the GA can undertake a complimentary
process of public comment in parallel.

What valuable input could the GA deliver?

- -- Thinking hard about the PROBLEMS which the proposals
   on the table, including the Stuart Lynn proposal, 
   the ALSC options, the NAIS recommendation, the 
   ccTLD-SO efforts are trying or claiming to solve: 
   Why do they need to be solved? Would the proposals be 
   likely to solve the problem, do they raise new 
   questions, can the problem be solved differently etc.?

- -- Thinking hard about the CONSEQUENCES of the proposals.
   What effects would the proposals have -- realistic 
   assessments and scenarios -- on the ICANN Board, the
   commercial, non-commercial and individual users,
   gTLD registrars, ccTLD and gTLD registries, ISPs etc.,
   on policy development, on funding and staffing, on 
   relationships with governments, on the danger of
   mission creep etc.

- -- Thinking hard about alternative SOLUTIONS. I am not 
   so sure we will all agree to a Great Unified Solution
   either; perhaps a set of well-argued options and an
   order of preference will be much better input.

My two cents just before the Public Forum is about to start.

Best regards,
/// Alexander

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:15:01 +0000
From: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Scribing of ICANN Public Forum and Board meeting

002 21:02, you wrote:
>Where (at what URL) will this scribing be visable?
>
>Peter de Blanc

I just asked Dan Halloran -- he will ask whether it
is visible online. I am presently at irc.dal.net, 
#icann.

Best regards,
/// Alexander

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:51:53 +0100
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: ADNS - Re: FTC - Re: New.net - Re: [ga] Sen. Burns to the Chair of the  Commerce Committee

On 21:29 12/03/02, Derek Conant said:
>I believe that the average consumer believes that a domain name works on 
>the Internet.  The FTC's apparent position is that which what the average 
>consumer believes the Internet is, is what the Internet is.

I believe that the average American believes a phone number works to to 
call someone on the phone. The FTC's should support the position that which 
what the average consumer believs the phone system is, is what the Phone 
system is. Hence it should jail all the fax users.

Nevertheless Derek has a good point. I propose that from now on normal IQ 
people should use the word "Intlnet" for the free international network and 
that we keep the word "internet" for the USG controled internal system 
reserved for dump people to be fooled in buying ICANN sponsored non 
products and absent services though the use of complex unecessary words 
such as ICP-3, DNS, TLDs, SLD, sponsored TLDs, sunrise periods, etc...

Let forget about all that blackmagic abusing people with a non existing 
complexity and let use simple words as:

- - the international data network naming plan : anyone having a problem 
understanding?
- - the (virtual/real) network names : seems clearer than TLD, SLD.TLD, etc...
- - the Intlnet names : seems clearer than domain names
- - the "whereis" service: easier to understand than DNS/BIND/NAMED etc...

Jefsey

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:10:05 +0100
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] GA proposition for the ICANN reform

Dear Thomas,
IRT a joint GA/NC proposition to reform the ICANN, IMHO there is the wrong 
way to do things: to start from a wrong design and to try to correct it. 
And there is a correct way - with no warranty of success - which is to 
understand what is the job, and what is necessary to perform it. And then 
to propose a compact solution.

We have two main job evaluations.

1. one is by network oriented people who want to manage a network and 
therefore want a strong center and a stable and secure control on the root 
server system.
2. the second is by Internet oriented people who want to support the 
internetwork and therefore want minimum of interferences with its natural 
working in order to protect its stability and security

At this stage of the user station architecture inherited from the past 
(mostly Windows/IE) it is true that both systems are worth to consider. So 
a compromise is necessary.

However the necessary/observed evolution of the user station architecture 
towards a standalone architecture is sure. You understand that when you 
read Vint, IAB, IETF, etc. documents. You know that when you consider that 
it was the architecture that prevailed (at monopolies/private nets of the 
time) and made money when the public net services were established in 
1978/1986. You see that when you consider the current "socialy correct".

We must therefore consider these two evaluations and make sure that nothing 
will block the evolution from the first to the second, what is the current 
problem. In plain words that the Root Server System may be under Pentagon 
control for the US interests and under EEC supervision for the European 
interests, etc... but that at the same time the obsolescence of the Root 
may be smoothly carried.

Stability and security will obviously be reached in that area when no one 
will have to rely on a synchronous third party process as any root server 
system.

Now, the economic impact must be accepted. Has the ICANN to consider it? 
IMHO no, except in being totally remote and neutral. In plain words to 
abandon the contract policy and go by standard accepted common rules qual 
to all. However, the same as the WIPO has been associated to the resolution 
of the naming problems (I do not judge the pertinence of the response), the 
WTO could be associated to the naming commercial issues. In particular, 
this would permit a correct addressing of the TLD squatting problem (by 
NameSlinger as well as RealNames) and resolve the New.net non-issue.

Jefsey

On 21:49 12/03/02, Thomas Roessler said:
>On 2002-03-12 15:29:48 -0500, Joanna Lane wrote:
>
>>Not that I disagree with your approach, and it's great to see a positive 
>>reaction to pull everybdoy together, but is the purpose of the WG to 
>>produce one definitive DNSO restructuring proposal on the basis of a 
>>consensus of participants in the proposed WG? Or do you think a number of 
>>mutually exclusive proposals may be put forward, each of which could go 
>>forward separately?
>
>What will have to be done first is this:
>
>- understand what kinds of proposals are out there
>- understand what these proposals mean
>- document that understanding
>
>At least for the first steps, it's not really important whether we strive 
>for the Great Unified Reform Plan (I don't believe we'll be the ones to 
>find that one, but we may wish to keep the goal within sight), or whether 
>we just try to end up with a set of distinct and well-understood 
>proposals.  In fact, the latter is a necessary step on the way to a GURP, 
>and it's a step to which the GA can reasonably try to contribute by 
>bundling public input into the DNSO's "GURP process". ;-)
>
>--
>Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.org/
>--
>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>Send mail to [email-masked] 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 [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 22:44:44 +1300
From: DPF <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Numbers - was [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 03:02:28 -0500, Joanna Lane <[email-masked]> wrote:
>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Joop
>Teernstra

>>First elections will be announced as soon as the supervisory Panel agrees
>>on the details. Nominations can already start now. See
>>www.icannatlarge.com/forum/
>
>Look Joop,
>I object to these elections. Please pass this on to the "supervisory panel",
>whatever that is and wherever that is. The priority for this At Large cannot
>possibly be selecting a "Supervisory panel" or "editorial committee" for the
>website or whatever the label is, when it is blindingly obvious what is
>driving the site in the current climate, and it has nothing do with any
>function that can be performed by a committee. It's all about *Numbers*.

I agree with Joanna very strongly.  This is cart before horse in a
very bad way.  There is nothing near consensus on the structure of the
at large and trying to turn it into IDNO v2 is going to fail.  

My suggestion on the ALSC mailing list was that if there had to be
interim elections it should be for just one body of say 10 people as a
steering cmte/exec and that those people elected to it be ineligible
to stand for any other at large office for 12 months (hence should
remove concerns about empire building).

As Joanna says the main thing now is to keep signing people up rather
than imposing a structure from the top down.

DPF
- --
[email-masked]
ICQ 29964527
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 04:03:32 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Numbers - was [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

Joanna and all assembly members,

  I must agree with much of Joanna's remarks and observations
regarding Joops never ending committees/pannels or what ever
at this stage in gaining members to a self forming At-Large
effort.  An editor would be a wonderful addition, and it MUST
be a professional one, not a volunteer.  That requires a budget,
which requires real $$ to PAY such and editor, which requires
a REAL account and necessary legal filings in whatever country
in order for those funds to be realized.  THAT should have been
Job one BEFORE the ICANNATLARGE.COM web site
was brought up.
The only free lunch I know of is out of a garbage can.  That
isn't very reliable at that...

Joanna Lane wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Joop
> Teernstra
> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 1:26 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members
>
> All this in about 12 days.
>
> GA members should spread the word. There are no ready funds yet to finance
> an outreach campaign. Only $16.900 in pledges.
>
> First elections will be announced as soon as the supervisory Panel agrees
> on the details. Nominations can already start now. See
> www.icannatlarge.com/forum/
>
> --Joop
>
> Look Joop,
> I object to these elections. Please pass this on to the "supervisory panel",
> whatever that is and wherever that is. The priority for this At Large cannot
> possibly be selecting a "Supervisory panel" or "editorial committee" for the
> website or whatever the label is, when it is blindingly obvious what is
> driving the site in the current climate, and it has nothing do with any
> function that can be performed by a committee. It's all about *Numbers*.
>
> Right now, the website is functioning more or less as a public news service,
> (or ought to be) in that it seeks to confirm *numbers of public interested*
> in the At Large and more than anything else, to undertake outreach and
> *increase numbers* while performing a community service by offering a forum
> to self-organize into groups so that a *number of stakeholder groups* can be
> determined to exist. We don't need a committee to set that agenda - it is
> already known. News programs are not run by committee. A departmental head
> directs and manages other teams from the top down, delegating significant
> powers to those teams who uncover key stories from the bottom to the surface
> where the editor ensures they are aired.
>
> The present climate is one of rapid change and as such, requires the GA, At
> Large and all Constituencies to think on their feet, something that is not
> possible if every decision has to go through a committee. The At large has
> tremendous advantage over the NC, the GA, the IDNO, in that it is *not*
> burdened by committees and structures.  Why replicate failure?
>
> If anything is needed for the At Large website, it is *one* person - an
> Editor, with communication skills to oversee the technical function of
> webmaster, somebody with at least a credible amount of experience in public
> service media, to ensure effective communication levels and balanced
> coverage for minorities. That's all.
>
> This Editor's core task is to attract *numbers*, and to encourage productive
> use of the forum to self-organize into like minded groups, whether that is
> domain name holders, non-domain name holders, regional assemblies, alternate
> root users, offshore casino owners anonymous, or whatever. At the moment,
> that is being hindered by a home page that does not point out that it is
> necessary to sign up to the forum separately in order to communicate or
> self-organize with other members, neither does it describe what the forum
> can offer. Members have no way of even knowing which members are in their
> region because no State/ County information is given, neither do they know
> whether any announcements of efforts to self organize will be announced
> through that list.
>
> These are fundamental problems in communication with your public that can be
> addressed by an Editor that knows what they're doing. They are observations,
> not criticisms that I use to illustrate the point that you don't need an
> elaborate series of elections to achieve what is necessary - particularly
> when it aims to form a committee of amateurs who, with the best will in the
> world, do not have the experience between them to replace one good Editor
> with a track record.
>
> Regards,
> Joanna
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 14:03:12 +0100
From: "jeanette hofmann" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Numbers - was [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

   451 Temporary local problem - please try later
   451 Temporary local problem - please try later

Your original mail message follows:
- --------------------------------------------------------

X-PM-Identity: <Default>
From: "jeanette hofmann" <[email-masked]>
To: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:22:14 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: RE: Numbers - was [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 
544
members Reply-to: [email-masked] CC: [email-masked]
Message-ID: <3C8F5286.2961.AEDE4E@localhost> Priority: 
normal
References: 
<[email-masked]>
In-reply-to: <DPEOJECBMOLLLJOFDNDPIEJECCAA.jo-
[email-masked]> X-mailer:
Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)

On 13 Mar 2002, at 3:02, Joanna Lane wrote:

Dear Joanna,

I think it is a very good idea to have a committee in charge a.s.a.p. 
that has the
backing of those who signed up as members. I think it is a bad 
idea to
rely on one web master or editor only. 

I would like to see appointed a handful of people, not more than
seven, committed and open-minded, who are able to ensure that
nobody can manipulate or abuse the process of building up support 
for an at large organization. As long as the list of subscribers is
growing fast, it seems not to be a good idea to work on a formal
charter that aims to establish a long term framework for an At large
organization. 

jeanette

> Look Joop,
> I object to these elections. Please pass this on to the "supervisory
> panel", whatever that is and wherever that is. The priority for this
> At Large cannot possibly be selecting a "Supervisory panel" or
> "editorial committee" for the website or whatever the label is, when
> it is blindingly obvious what is driving the site in the current
> climate, and it has nothing do with any function that can be
> performed by a committee. It's all about *Numbers*.
> 
> Right now, the website is functioning more or less as a public news
> service, (or ought to be) in that it seeks to confirm *numbers of
> public interested* in the At Large and more than anything else, to
> undertake outreach and *increase numbers* while performing a
> community service by offering a forum to self-organize into groups
> so that a *number of stakeholder groups* can be determined to exist.
> We don't need a committee to set that agenda - it is already known.
> News programs are not run by committee. A departmental head directs
> and manages other teams from the top down, delegating significant
> powers to those teams who uncover key stories from the bottom to the
> surface where the editor ensures they are aired.
> 
> The present climate is one of rapid change and as such, requires the
> GA, At Large and all Constituencies to think on their feet,
> something that is not possible if every decision has to go through a
> committee. The At large has tremendous advantage over the NC, the
> GA, the IDNO, in that it is *not* burdened by committees and
> structures.  Why replicate failure?
> 
> If anything is needed for the At Large website, it is *one* person -
> an Editor, with communication skills to oversee the technical
> function of webmaster, somebody with at least a credible amount of
> experience in public service media, to ensure effective
> communication levels and balanced coverage for minorities. That's
> all.
> 
> This Editor's core task is to attract *numbers*, and to encourage
> productive use of the forum to self-organize into like minded
> groups, whether that is domain name holders, non-domain name
> holders, regional assemblies, alternate root users, offshore casino
> owners anonymous, or whatever. At the moment, that is being hindered
> by a home page that does not point out that it is necessary to sign
> up to the forum separately in order to communicate or self-organize
> with other members, neither does it describe what the forum can
> offer. Members have no way of even knowing which members are in
> their region because no State/ County information is given, neither
> do they know whether any announcements of efforts to self organize
> will be announced through that list.
> 
> These are fundamental problems in communication with your public
> that can be addressed by an Editor that knows what they're doing.
> They are observations, not criticisms that I use to illustrate the
> point that you don't need an elaborate series of elections to
> achieve what is necessary - particularly when it aims to form a
> committee of amateurs who, with the best will in the world, do not
> have the experience between them to replace one good Editor with a
> track record.
> 
> Regards,
> Joanna
> 
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 

- ------- End of forwarded message -------
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1079
*************************