Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1114
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Wednesday, April 3 2002          Volume 01 : Number 1114

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

Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:14:11 -0500
From: Rob Courtney <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Final Statement of NAIS

Members of the General Assembly:

Attached is the final statement of the NGO and Academic ICANN Study. 
For more information please visit http://www.naisproject.org/

r

* * *

Final Statement by the
NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS)

April 2002

Since November 2000, an international, interdisciplinary team of 
researchers known as the NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS) has 
investigated pragmatic mechanisms for incorporating the public voice 
into the activities of ICANN. The work for which the NAIS group was 
created - research, analysis, and the preparation of a comprehensive 
report on At-Large membership and the role of the public voice in 
ICANN - is largely complete.

The members of NAIS strongly believe that our collaboration has been 
a fruitful one, with a positive impact on debate in the ICANN 
community; we hope it will inform future dialogue as the At-Large 
community continues to coalesce at ICANN.

We leave a set of resources for general use, available at our website 
http://www.naisproject.org, that we hope will continue to inform the 
community as debate continues about the role and structure of ICANN, 
and about technical coordination more generally:

* The NAIS report "ICANN, Legitimacy, and the Public Voice: Making 
Global Representation and Participation Work" (August 2001) stands as 
a comprehensive analysis of the need for a public voice in ICANN, and 
offers suggestions for how best to address that need.  It also 
provides for the only in depth and regional analysis of the global 
At-Large elections that took place in 2000. [ FN 1 ]
* The NAIS group's interactions with ICANN's At-Large Study Committee 
led to convergence on key issues of the At-Large Membership. NAIS has 
produced a detailed implementation plan for an At-Large membership in 
its February 2002 Statement.  Many of the issues remain valid and we 
believe it may provide a blueprint for future actions.

The NAIS Final Report and other materials also provided detailed 
analysis of issues of ongoing relevance to discussions about the 
future of ICANN's structure and processes, including:

* Suggestions for enhancing accountability mechanisms needed by 
ICANN. Available at 
http://www.naisproject.org/report/final/3.6.2.shtml [et seq.].
* Examination of ICANN's need for a coherent, limited statement of 
its mission and authorities, and a proposal for what such a statement 
could look like. Available at 
http://www.naisproject.org/report/final/3.6.1.1.shtml.
* Analysis of the role of governments in ICANN, including a critique 
of the notion that governments might appoint At-Large Directors to 
the ICANN Board. Available at 
http://www.naisproject.org/report/final/3.3.3.2.shtml.
* Suggestions for building efficient, stable mechanisms of public 
participation in ICANN. Available at 
http://www.naisproject.org/report/final/3.4.shtml [et seq.].

We were disappointed to witness, in Accra, the ICANN Board of 
Directors' abandonment of its own study process, which had 
recommended moving forward with public representation on the ICANN 
board through direct elections.  We emphatically urge the Board to 
remember that the final credibility of ICANN as a global manager of 
critical parts of the Internet's infrastructure depends on the 
Board's ability to ensure that the public's interests are represented 
in ICANN's activities.  If the Board rejects elections as the best 
way to serve this goal, then it must implement a better alternative, 
not abandon the goal.

With the work for which the NAIS group was created complete, NAIS 
members' activities will take on new dimensions and will proceed in 
new directions. There remains a great deal of work ahead.

The grassroots efforts underway to build a structure for 
participation by users interested in ICANN (see 
http://www.icannatlarge.com) are important and have been undertaken 
in the best traditions of the Internet. Efforts to restate the scope 
and nature of ICANN's mission are equally critical. And the recently 
opened discussion of ICANN-wide restructuring requires public 
participation and oversight if it is to proceed effectively and 
fairly. We will continue working, individually and collaboratively, 
on these issues and we hope others in the community will join us in 
these efforts.

The members of the NAIS project wish to acknowledge the contributions 
made by the worldwide Internet community to our work. In addition, we 
wish to express our deep appreciation to the Markle Foundation for 
its generous support of this project. We look forward to future work, 
with each other and with others in the community, to promote 
recognition of the public's interest in the activities of ICANN.

ABOUT NAIS

The NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS) was established as an 
international and independent (from the ALSC) project to review the 
nature of public participation and representation in the Internet's 
domain name management organization, the Internet Corporation for 
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
The NAIS team began as an ad hoc effort in November 2000 by a global 
group of researchers to study the 2000 At-Large Election and to 
answer tough questions about the importance of public participation 
and representation in ICANN's activities. From November 2000 to 
August 2001, the NAIS team examined the details and effects of the 
2000 election on a worldwide scale, consulted with diverse sections 
of the Internet community, and closely analyzed the roots of ICANN's 
legitimacy online. The NAIS report, "ICANN, Legitimacy, and the 
Public Voice: Making Global Participation and Representation Work," 
was released on August 31, 2001.

- ---

[ fn 1 ] The Carter Center also published a detailed monitoring 
report on the election, available at 
http://www.cartercenter.org/REPORTS/ICANNFinalReport.pdf.
- -- 

Rob Courtney
Policy Analyst
Center for Democracy & Technology
1634 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20006
202 637 9800
fax 202 637 0968
[email-masked]
http://www.cdt.org/

  --

Add your voice to the Internet policy debate!
    JOIN THE CDT ACTIVIST NETWORK!
      http://www.cdt.org/join/
- --
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, 02 Apr 2002 21:39:27 -0500
From: vint cerf <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: Open Letter to Mr Jeff Neuman from The Internet Challenge

Richard,

I just want to acknowledge receipt of your message. 

The odd correlations make me wonder whether the registrars
you specifically mention were created by or for the parties
who used them to make the registrations?

vint

At 01:06 AM 4/3/2002 +0100, Richard Henderson wrote:

>From:  Richard Henderson, 8 Robin Hill, Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire, HP4 2HX, UK<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
>
>Telephone: +44 (0)1442-863838
>
>Organisation: The Internet Challenge
>
>(A group of Internet users from over 20 countries)
>
>Address: <http://www.theinternetchallenge.com/>http://www.theInternetChallenge.com 
>
>(See with reference to .biz: <http://www.theinternetchallenge.com/biz.htm>http://www.theInternetChallenge.com/biz.htm )
>
> 

- --
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, 02 Apr 2002 22:11:00 -0800
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Reality

<from VC>

 Richard,

 I just want to acknowledge receipt of your message.

 The odd correlations make me wonder whether the registrars
 you specifically mention were created by or for the parties
 who used them to make the registrations?

 vint

Generally Vint we would use the term Created By and For the People.

Parties means almost nothing.  But I don't want to have you think that
us underlings have any appropriate rights.

Eric

- --
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, 02 Apr 2002 22:21:22 -0800
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] poll

Do you still want to contribute to the GA?

{  }

Do you think there is no or almost no use to contributing to the GA.

{  }

We all know the various reasons but add them if you care to.

- --
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, 03 Apr 2002 07:19:43 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Internet Registries position

For information
jfc

- -----Original Message-----
From: Ray Plzak [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 12:02 PM
To: Stuart Lynn ([email-masked])
Cc: 'Axel Pawlik'; Paul Wilson ([email-masked])
Subject: Contract between ICANN and the Regional Internet Registries

2 April 2002
M. Stuart Lynn
President and CEO
ICANN
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6601 USA
Subject: Contract between ICANN and the Regional Internet Registries

Dear Stuart:

The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) have reached the position in the
drafting of a contract between the RIRs and the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) where there is a draft contract that
represents agreement between the RIRs and ICANN on matters of roles,
responsibilities and procedures relating to Internet address management
and global address management policies. This contract would further
codify the existing working relationship between the RIRs and ICANN
which is set forth in the ASO MOU.

Completion of the contract is contingent on the outcome of a number of
further steps:

   - It is anticipated that the draft contract will be the subject of a
   process of public review within the ICANN and RIR constituencies.  Any
   proposed changes to the contract as a result of these reviews will
   require further consultation between the parties.

   - The RIRs also note that a program of evolution and reform has been
   initiated by ICANN that may result in outcomes for ICANN that could have
   a material effect on the ability of the parties to complete their
   commitments as documented in the draft contract. This situation will be
   monitored by the parties during ICANN's process of defining any
   consequent reform activities.

The RIR's have been holding contract payments to ICANN in escrow pending
completion of the contract. As an sign of good faith at this stage of
the process, the RIRs will release one half of these funds to ICANN.

The Regional Internet Registries are:
       The American Registry for Internet Numbers (www.arin.net) (ARIN)
       Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (www.ripe.net)
       (RIPE NCC)
       Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (www.apnic.net) (APNIC)

P. Wilson
Director General
APNIC

R. Plzak
President and CEO
ARIN

A. Pawlik
Managing Director
RIPE NCC

- --
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, 03 Apr 2002 02:18:39 -0500
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Internet Registries position

How much is half of these funds exactly? (Useful for individuals to know how
much buys the ICANN Board).
Joanna

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Jefsey
Morfin
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 12:20 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Internet Registries position

For information
jfc

- -----Original Message-----
From: Ray Plzak [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 12:02 PM
To: Stuart Lynn ([email-masked])
Cc: 'Axel Pawlik'; Paul Wilson ([email-masked])
Subject: Contract between ICANN and the Regional Internet Registries

2 April 2002
M. Stuart Lynn
President and CEO
ICANN
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6601 USA
Subject: Contract between ICANN and the Regional Internet Registries

Dear Stuart:

The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) have reached the position in the
drafting of a contract between the RIRs and the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) where there is a draft contract that
represents agreement between the RIRs and ICANN on matters of roles,
responsibilities and procedures relating to Internet address management
and global address management policies. This contract would further
codify the existing working relationship between the RIRs and ICANN
which is set forth in the ASO MOU.

Completion of the contract is contingent on the outcome of a number of
further steps:

   - It is anticipated that the draft contract will be the subject of a
   process of public review within the ICANN and RIR constituencies.  Any
   proposed changes to the contract as a result of these reviews will
   require further consultation between the parties.

   - The RIRs also note that a program of evolution and reform has been
   initiated by ICANN that may result in outcomes for ICANN that could have
   a material effect on the ability of the parties to complete their
   commitments as documented in the draft contract. This situation will be
   monitored by the parties during ICANN's process of defining any
   consequent reform activities.

The RIR's have been holding contract payments to ICANN in escrow pending
completion of the contract. As an sign of good faith at this stage of
the process, the RIRs will release one half of these funds to ICANN.

The Regional Internet Registries are:
       The American Registry for Internet Numbers (www.arin.net) (ARIN)
       Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (www.ripe.net)
       (RIPE NCC)
       Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (www.apnic.net) (APNIC)

P. Wilson
Director General
APNIC

R. Plzak
President and CEO
ARIN

A. Pawlik
Managing Director
RIPE NCC

- --
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, 03 Apr 2002 05:22:33 -0500
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Internet Registries position

>
>
>P. Wilson wrote:
>
>-  The RIRs also note that a program of evolution and reform has been initiated by ICANN that may result in outcomes for ICANN that could have a material effect on the ability of the parties to complete their commitments as documented in the draft contract. 
>
I would very much like to know which draft contract exactly?  Can you 
help?  

[BTW It's interesting to note that "a program of evolution and reform has been initiated by ICANN"]

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

- -- 
Decision-making on major issues is now vested in international institutions which are so remote from public influence, that the public has no idea what's going on. I mean, in the case of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), incidentally the Labor Advisory Committee report was never reported in the press, right, I'd be surprised if any of you know about it, here's a case where the government radically violated the law, demonstrated utter contempt for the democratic process, rammed through a secret executive agreement of enormous influence, wouldn't even let the one popular group that is supposed to see it by law, the labor- based group, even look at it, they write the report, and then the press censors it. All right, here we have the ultimate in the destruction of democracy, the ideal that everybody's been dreaming of. Not only is the rabble excluded, they don't influence policy, but they don't know what's in policy, and finally they don't know that they don't know. Virtually nobody knows that they don't know what is going on. Well, you know, now we've reached the ultimate. That's the ultimate possibility in the destruction of democracy.

- -Noam Chomsky, "Old Wine, New Bottles: Free Trade, Global Markets and Military Adventures"
the above article in its thoroughly engrossing entirety can be found at: http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/talks/9302-uva.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, 03 Apr 2002 05:22:00 -0500
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Internet Registries position

>
>
>P. Wilson wrote:
>
>-  The RIRs also note that a program of evolution and reform has been initiated by ICANN that may result in outcomes for ICANN that could have a material effect on the ability of the parties to complete their commitments as documented in the draft contract. 
>
I would very much like to know which draft contract exactly?  Can you 
help?  

[It's also interesting to note that "a program of evolution and reform has been initiated by ICANN"]

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

- -- 
Decision-making on major issues is now vested in international institutions which are so remote from public influence, that the public has no idea what's going on. I mean, in the case of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), incidentally the Labor Advisory Committee report was never reported in the press, right, I'd be surprised if any of you know about it, here's a case where the government radically violated the law, demonstrated utter contempt for the democratic process, rammed through a secret executive agreement of enormous influence, wouldn't even let the one popular group that is supposed to see it by law, the labor- based group, even look at it, they write the report, and then the press censors it. All right, here we have the ultimate in the destruction of democracy, the ideal that everybody's been dreaming of. Not only is the rabble excluded, they don't influence policy, but they don't know what's in policy, and finally they don't know that they don't know. Virtually nobody knows that they don't know what is going on. Well, you know, now we've reached the ultimate. That's the ultimate possibility in the destruction of democracy.

- -Noam Chomsky, "Old Wine, New Bottles: Free Trade, Global Markets and Military Adventures"
the above article in its thoroughly engrossing entirety can be found at: http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/talks/9302-uva.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, 3 Apr 2002 14:35:12 +0200
From: "DNSO Secretariat" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] NC teleconf agenda 4 April 2002

[To: [email-masked]: [email-masked]]
[To: [email-masked]]

Names Council Agenda 4 April 2002 (120 mins)

  1. Date, time, .

     The Names Council teleconference will be held on 4 April 2002 at the
     following time 13:00 UTC

     (5:00 LA, 8:00 New York, 15:00 Paris, 22:00 Japan/Korea, 23:00
Melbourne
    For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/

     The full participants are the 21 NC members as listed in
     http://www.dnso.org/constituency/ncmembers.html, DNSO Secretariat and
     ICANN Officers
    Philip Sheppard will be chairing the NC teleconference.

     Scheduled time for meeting - 120 mins.

   1 Agenda and related documents

     This is the second teleconference after Accra dedicated to ICANN Reform

     Proposed NC Agenda April 4
    The following order of topics is proposed for the next Names Council
calls:

     1.Funding
     - Short term
     - Long term

     2.Advisory Bodies

     3.Management of advisory bodies

     4.Stakeholder participation

     5.Board composition

     6.Transparency

     I propose a first pass where we seek areas of common agreement and then
     we revisit to discuss areas where constituencies have differing views.
     Our timeline is short. The Evolution committee has said it wants input
     by April 29 to be useful. This differs from the timeline indicated by
     Stuart Lynn in Ghana (May 15.) upon which the current schedule of NC
     calls was based. For now I do not propose any additional calls but we
     can re-evaluate that as we proceed.

     Minutes from previous teleconference on ICANN reform
     http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020322.NCteleconf-minutes.html

     Terms of reference for DNSO response to the case for reform.

http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2002.NC-tor-DNSO-response-ICANN-reform.v3.htm
l

     ICANN Staff Draft: Toward a Statement of the ICANN Mission
     http://www.icann.org/general/toward-mission-statement-07mar02.htm

Note:

The next teleconference will be as scheduled 18 April at 15.00 Paris time.

- --
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, 03 Apr 2002 04:47:47 -0800
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Internet Registries position

I think the other way around is interesting.  If you look at the contracts they
basically have a
provision that allows any undesirables in icanns view to be cut off from
service.
This of course would include any ccTLD that did not sign a "sponsorship"
contract.
And remember these are not service contracts because icann cannot sign a service
contract.
Wait until the court gives Karl his demanded papers.

Eric

Joanna Lane wrote:

> How much is half of these funds exactly? (Useful for individuals to know how
> much buys the ICANN Board).
> Joanna
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Jefsey
> Morfin
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 12:20 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [ga] Internet Registries position
>
> For information
> jfc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Plzak [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 12:02 PM
> To: Stuart Lynn ([email-masked])
> Cc: 'Axel Pawlik'; Paul Wilson ([email-masked])
> Subject: Contract between ICANN and the Regional Internet Registries
>
> 2 April 2002
> M. Stuart Lynn
> President and CEO
> ICANN
> 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
> Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6601 USA
> Subject: Contract between ICANN and the Regional Internet Registries
>
> Dear Stuart:
>
> The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) have reached the position in the
> drafting of a contract between the RIRs and the Internet Corporation for
> Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) where there is a draft contract that
> represents agreement between the RIRs and ICANN on matters of roles,
> responsibilities and procedures relating to Internet address management
> and global address management policies. This contract would further
> codify the existing working relationship between the RIRs and ICANN
> which is set forth in the ASO MOU.
>
> Completion of the contract is contingent on the outcome of a number of
> further steps:
>
>    - It is anticipated that the draft contract will be the subject of a
>    process of public review within the ICANN and RIR constituencies.  Any
>    proposed changes to the contract as a result of these reviews will
>    require further consultation between the parties.
>
>    - The RIRs also note that a program of evolution and reform has been
>    initiated by ICANN that may result in outcomes for ICANN that could have
>    a material effect on the ability of the parties to complete their
>    commitments as documented in the draft contract. This situation will be
>    monitored by the parties during ICANN's process of defining any
>    consequent reform activities.
>
> The RIR's have been holding contract payments to ICANN in escrow pending
> completion of the contract. As an sign of good faith at this stage of
> the process, the RIRs will release one half of these funds to ICANN.
>
> The Regional Internet Registries are:
>        The American Registry for Internet Numbers (www.arin.net) (ARIN)
>        Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (www.ripe.net)
>        (RIPE NCC)
>        Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (www.apnic.net) (APNIC)
>
> P. Wilson
> Director General
> APNIC
>
> R. Plzak
> President and CEO
> ARIN
>
> A. Pawlik
> Managing Director
> RIPE NCC
>
> --
> 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

- --
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, 03 Apr 2002 05:23:55 -0800
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] poll

Reality is a tough matter sometimes.

We have to make tough choices.  Moving on to different venues is not
defeatism.
When we are faced with a fork in the road choosing one does not mean we were
beat by the other.
But mainly I expect that we will get almost no response to this poll as most
don't even care anymore.

sincerely
eric

Jeff Williams wrote:

> Eric and all assembly members,
>
> [email-masked] wrote:
>
> > Do you still want to contribute to the GA?
> >
> > {  }
>
> Yes of course.  No contribution is no chance for change and progress, of
>
> which both are sorely needed in the GA.
>
> >
> >
> > Do you think there is no or almost no use to contributing to the GA.
> >
> > {  }
>
>   No.  Defeatism is self defeating...
>
> >
> >
> > We all know the various reasons but add them if you care to.
> >
> > --
> > 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, 03 Apr 2002 05:33:48 -0800
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] NC teleconf agenda 4 April 2002

I would sure be embarrassed to be a part of this failure.  Sheppy has sure done
a good job of making his council a laughing stock.

Here is a major point of restructuring.  This council has been a major choke
stone prohibiting the bottom up stakeholder open and transparent movement.

If I were the Staff, I would do some spin doctoring here lay the problem on
these guys (of course with a leak first for plausible denial) and suggest a
direct GA.  That would give staff another year or so of obfuscation.

Eric

DNSO Secretariat wrote:

> [To: [email-masked]: [email-masked]]
> [To: [email-masked]]
>
> Names Council Agenda 4 April 2002 (120 mins)
>      Proposed NC Agenda April 4
>     The following order of topics is proposed for the next Names Council
> calls:
>
>      1.Funding
>      - Short term
>      - Long term
>
>      2.Advisory Bodies
>
>      3.Management of advisory bodies
>
>      4.Stakeholder participation
>
>      5.Board composition
>
>      6.Transparency
>
>      I propose a first pass where we seek areas of common agreement and then
>      we revisit to discuss areas where constituencies have differing views.
>      Our timeline is short. The Evolution committee has said it wants input
>      by April 29 to be useful. This differs from the timeline indicated by
>      Stuart Lynn in Ghana (May 15.) upon which the current schedule of NC
>      calls was based. For now I do not propose any additional calls but we
>      can re-evaluate that as we proceed.
>
>      Minutes from previous teleconference on ICANN reform
>      http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020322.NCteleconf-minutes.html
>
>      Terms of reference for DNSO response to the case for reform.
>
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2002.NC-tor-DNSO-response-ICANN-reform.v3.htm
> l
>
>      ICANN Staff Draft: Toward a Statement of the ICANN Mission
>      http://www.icann.org/general/toward-mission-statement-07mar02.htm
>
> Note:
>
> The next teleconference will be as scheduled 18 April at 15.00 Paris time.
>
> --
> 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, 03 Apr 2002 05:51:50 -0800
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Leadership

Where is the Black Hole that our leaders go into when we elect them?  I
would like to see it.

The only leadership as in chairman's that we have seen here is a skewed
view in a summary that without vote is included in our archives (nice
freaking move and dead wrong) and censorship, with one of our leaders
running off with Ester in Accra, while on grants that will not fund
Ester.

There is some sick stuff that happens when we lack the ability to poll
and vote.  There is even more sick stuff that happens when leaders
endorse and support apathy so they can play away at their own hidden
agendas.

Is the GA killed by it's own hand?

sincerely,
eric

- --
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, 03 Apr 2002 06:04:18 -0800
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] [Fwd: [ALSC-Forum] Final Statement of NAIS]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------4C78BA3AD568CF7E94AC11EF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

We would be wise to listen and understand this position.

sincerely,
eric

- --------------4C78BA3AD568CF7E94AC11EF
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:17:39 -0500
Resent-Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:14:29 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: Rob Courtney <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ALSC-Forum] Final Statement of NAIS
Sender: [email-masked]
Resent-From: [email-masked]
Resent-Cc: recipient list not shown: ;

Members of the ALSC-Forum:

Attached is the final statement of the NGO and Academic ICANN Study. 
For more information please visit http://www.naisproject.org/

r

* * *

Final Statement by the
NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS)

April 2002

Since November 2000, an international, interdisciplinary team of 
researchers known as the NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS) has 
investigated pragmatic mechanisms for incorporating the public voice 
into the activities of ICANN. The work for which the NAIS group was 
created - research, analysis, and the preparation of a comprehensive 
report on At-Large membership and the role of the public voice in 
ICANN - is largely complete.

The members of NAIS strongly believe that our collaboration has been 
a fruitful one, with a positive impact on debate in the ICANN 
community; we hope it will inform future dialogue as the At-Large 
community continues to coalesce at ICANN.

We leave a set of resources for general use, available at our website 
http://www.naisproject.org, that we hope will continue to inform the 
community as debate continues about the role and structure of ICANN, 
and about technical coordination more generally:

* The NAIS report "ICANN, Legitimacy, and the Public Voice: Making 
Global Representation and Participation Work" (August 2001) stands as 
a comprehensive analysis of the need for a public voice in ICANN, and 
offers suggestions for how best to address that need.  It also 
provides for the only in depth and regional analysis of the global 
At-Large elections that took place in 2000. [ FN 1 ]
* The NAIS group's interactions with ICANN's At-Large Study Committee 
led to convergence on key issues of the At-Large Membership. NAIS has 
produced a detailed implementation plan for an At-Large membership in 
its February 2002 Statement.  Many of the issues remain valid and we 
believe it may provide a blueprint for future actions.

The NAIS Final Report and other materials also provided detailed 
analysis of issues of ongoing relevance to discussions about the 
future of ICANN's structure and processes, including:

* Suggestions for enhancing accountability mechanisms needed by 
ICANN. Available at 
http://www.naisproject.org/report/final/3.6.2.shtml [et seq.].
* Examination of ICANN's need for a coherent, limited statement of 
its mission and authorities, and a proposal for what such a statement 
could look like. Available at 
http://www.naisproject.org/report/final/3.6.1.1.shtml.
* Analysis of the role of governments in ICANN, including a critique 
of the notion that governments might appoint At-Large Directors to 
the ICANN Board. Available at 
http://www.naisproject.org/report/final/3.3.3.2.shtml.
* Suggestions for building efficient, stable mechanisms of public 
participation in ICANN. Available at 
http://www.naisproject.org/report/final/3.4.shtml [et seq.].

We were disappointed to witness, in Accra, the ICANN Board of 
Directors' abandonment of its own study process, which had 
recommended moving forward with public representation on the ICANN 
board through direct elections.  We emphatically urge the Board to 
remember that the final credibility of ICANN as a global manager of 
critical parts of the Internet's infrastructure depends on the 
Board's ability to ensure that the public's interests are represented 
in ICANN's activities.  If the Board rejects elections as the best 
way to serve this goal, then it must implement a better alternative, 
not abandon the goal.

With the work for which the NAIS group was created complete, NAIS 
members' activities will take on new dimensions and will proceed in 
new directions. There remains a great deal of work ahead.

The grassroots efforts underway to build a structure for 
participation by users interested in ICANN (see 
http://www.icannatlarge.com) are important and have been undertaken 
in the best traditions of the Internet. Efforts to restate the scope 
and nature of ICANN's mission are equally critical. And the recently 
opened discussion of ICANN-wide restructuring requires public 
participation and oversight if it is to proceed effectively and 
fairly. We will continue working, individually and collaboratively, 
on these issues and we hope others in the community will join us in 
these efforts.

The members of the NAIS project wish to acknowledge the contributions 
made by the worldwide Internet community to our work. In addition, we 
wish to express our deep appreciation to the Markle Foundation for 
its generous support of this project. We look forward to future work, 
with each other and with others in the community, to promote 
recognition of the public's interest in the activities of ICANN.

ABOUT NAIS

The NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS) was established as an 
international and independent (from the ALSC) project to review the 
nature of public participation and representation in the Internet's 
domain name management organization, the Internet Corporation for 
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
The NAIS team began as an ad hoc effort in November 2000 by a global 
group of researchers to study the 2000 At-Large Election and to 
answer tough questions about the importance of public participation 
and representation in ICANN's activities. From November 2000 to 
August 2001, the NAIS team examined the details and effects of the 
2000 election on a worldwide scale, consulted with diverse sections 
of the Internet community, and closely analyzed the roots of ICANN's 
legitimacy online. The NAIS report, "ICANN, Legitimacy, and the 
Public Voice: Making Global Participation and Representation Work," 
was released on August 31, 2001.

- ---

[ fn 1 ] The Carter Center also published a detailed monitoring 
report on the election, available at 
http://www.cartercenter.org/REPORTS/ICANNFinalReport.pdf.
- -- 

Rob Courtney
Policy Analyst
Center for Democracy & Technology
1634 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20006
202 637 9800
fax 202 637 0968
[email-masked]
http://www.cdt.org/

  --

Add your voice to the Internet policy debate!
    JOIN THE CDT ACTIVIST NETWORK!
      http://www.cdt.org/join/

- --------------4C78BA3AD568CF7E94AC11EF--

- --
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 #1114
*************************