Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #774
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Thursday, October 4 2001          Volume 01 : Number 774

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

Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 00:33:06 -0700 
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Recall of GA Chair

If William had made the deadline, would it still be on the agenda.
Considering the William seems to be the only one supporting that request?

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: Joanna Lane [mailto:[email-masked]]
|> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 11:23 PM
|> To: Peter de Blanc; 'Jeff Williams'; 'Joop Teernstra'; Paul M. Kane;
|> Philip Shepard
|> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
|> Subject: [ga] Re: Recall of GA Chair
|> 
|> 
|> On a point of order, item 8, Recall of GA Chair, should not 
|> be included as
|> an Agenda item for the Oct 11 NC meeting as this item was 
|> submitted too late
|> to the Intake Committee - 17 days prior to the next meeting, 
|> which is less
|> than the 21 days required by its adopted rules.
|> 
|> The basis for this item's inclusion on the NC agenda item 
|> would appear to
|> amount to a single complaint by one person of the GA. To use Philip
|> Shepard's own words to the Intake Committee regarding NC procedures,
|> "Remember, each agenda will have a hyperlink to the e-mail 
|> input for that
|> agenda, so anyone can follow the correspondence if they want 
|> to spend the
|> time." 
|> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00056.html. There
|> are no hyperlinks for this agenda item because there has 
|> been no e-mail
|> input and therefore, no matter how much time NC members may 
|> be willing and
|> able to put into it, it would be a complete waste of their time.
|> 
|> For your further information, the e-mail history is as follows:-
|> 
|> On Sept 23, William X Walsh posted a comment to the General 
|> Assembly mailing
|> list requesting a recall of the GA Chair position, copied to 
|> the NC Chair.
|> 
|> On Sept 24, Philip Shepard forwarded the aforementioned 
|> comment by William
|> Walsh to the Intake Committee mailing list.
|> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00306.html.
|> 
|> On Sept 26, Philip Shepard posted a draft agenda for Oct 11 
|> NC meeting, in
|> which Recall of GA Chair appears as item 8.
|> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00309.html. In
|> consideration of recent events and priorities dictated by 
|> the same, serious
|> consideration of the Intake Committee was not given to this 
|> late addition.
|> 
|> On Oct 1st, Philip Shepard instructed the Secretariat to 
|> announce the NC Oct
|> 11 meeting agenda, including item 8.
|> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00312.html
|> 
|> 
|> Regards,
|> Joanna Lane
|> 
|> --
|> 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: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 09:37:25 +0200
From: "Philip Sheppard" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] NC agenda and Recall of GA Chair

Joanna,

I would not read too much into the appearance of agenda item 8 about the
recall of the GA chair. I do not expect a vote to be taken on this item. All
that has happened is that a member of the GA felt strongly enough to request
a recall and it seemed inappropriate to ignore this.

And please do not get too entangled in NC rules and procedures. We have
written some guidelines to help ensure that advance notice is given on
complex issues so that constituencies can debate them and give guidance to
their reps before an NC meeting. Some times these time limits are met, some
times not - they are guidelines not statutes, designed to help us not bind
us.

Philip

- --
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: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 02:51:33 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Recall of GA Chair

Joanna and all assembly members,

  Yes Joanna, we already know as Phillip enumerated upon these
points yesterday.  WXW is only again attempting to be disruptive
and display his feud and dislike for Danny and use the NC as
a platform by which he can extend that behavior.  I find it
inappropriate and inconsiderate of the GA members in particular.

Joanna Lane wrote:

> On a point of order, item 8, Recall of GA Chair, should not be included as
> an Agenda item for the Oct 11 NC meeting as this item was submitted too late
> to the Intake Committee - 17 days prior to the next meeting, which is less
> than the 21 days required by its adopted rules.
>
> The basis for this item's inclusion on the NC agenda item would appear to
> amount to a single complaint by one person of the GA. To use Philip
> Shepard's own words to the Intake Committee regarding NC procedures,
> "Remember, each agenda will have a hyperlink to the e-mail input for that
> agenda, so anyone can follow the correspondence if they want to spend the
> time." http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00056.html. There
> are no hyperlinks for this agenda item because there has been no e-mail
> input and therefore, no matter how much time NC members may be willing and
> able to put into it, it would be a complete waste of their time.
>
> For your further information, the e-mail history is as follows:-
>
> On Sept 23, William X Walsh posted a comment to the General Assembly mailing
> list requesting a recall of the GA Chair position, copied to the NC Chair.
>
> On Sept 24, Philip Shepard forwarded the aforementioned comment by William
> Walsh to the Intake Committee mailing list.
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00306.html.
>
> On Sept 26, Philip Shepard posted a draft agenda for Oct 11 NC meeting, in
> which Recall of GA Chair appears as item 8.
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00309.html. In
> consideration of recent events and priorities dictated by the same, serious
> consideration of the Intake Committee was not given to this late addition.
>
> On Oct 1st, Philip Shepard instructed the Secretariat to announce the NC Oct
> 11 meeting agenda, including item 8.
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00312.html
>
> Regards,
> Joanna Lane
>
> --
> 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 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 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: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 01:08:48 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Recall of GA Chair

Wednesday, Wednesday, October 03, 2001, 11:23:20 PM, Joanna Lane wrote:

> On a point of order, item 8, Recall of GA Chair, should not be included as
> an Agenda item for the Oct 11 NC meeting as this item was submitted too late
> to the Intake Committee - 17 days prior to the next meeting, which is less
> than the 21 days required by its adopted rules.

Why do you oppose elimination of one of the major roadblocks to the
GA's accomplishing anything?

What has Danny done for the GA, Joanna?  Specifics please.

Another person on this list who has posted in opposition of this item
this evening, has also stated to me that their opposition is not
because Danny has been an effective leader, but because "a poor leader
is better than none."  I believe this statement was made because of
what some were perceiving would be occurring at the AGM in MDR.  Now
that we know the GA will have little to no role in the affairs at the
AGM, and that the issues that the GA are considering will not be under
consideration at this time, this is the perfect time to get a new
leader, since we have plenty of time to do so, and to do it right.

The same person who made the above comment about a poor leader being
better than none, also made a comment that the recall of the GA chair
would mark the end of the GA, I say that the end of the GA has already
occurred unless we get an effective leader who can accomplish things
in much the fashion that you yourself, Joanna, believe things should
accomplish.  Danny does not properly guide or direct debate and
discussion on this list, nor does he engage in any constructive
activity to guide this group towards consensus.  He is more interested
in getting a few people to say they agree with something he posts
here, and then before more comment can be made, send it off as a
general consensus of the GA, using his position as a bully pulpit for
his own views, rather than working to help the GA get points of
consensus on the wide variety of issues of concern that can show the
GA can actually accomplish something.

I challenge anyone who opposes my request to tell me that our Chair
and Alt-Chair have been effective, and to do so with a straight face.
Opposing the request because you think a poor chair is acceptable,
rather than seeking something more than simply acceptable, is
irresponsible.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

- --
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: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 01:09:56 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] NC agenda and Recall of GA Chair

Thursday, Thursday, October 04, 2001, 12:37:25 AM, Philip Sheppard wrote:

> Joanna,

> I would not read too much into the appearance of agenda item 8 about the
> recall of the GA chair. I do not expect a vote to be taken on this item. All

How unfortunate that the Names Council doesn't take the paralysis of
the GA as a result of lack of an effective Chair seriously enough to
want to act to resolve it so that the GA can become effective and
productive.

Does the Names Council not want the GA to be strong and effective?

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

- --
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: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 01:34:06 -0700 
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] NC agenda and Recall of GA Chair

|> From: William X Walsh [mailto:[email-masked]]
|> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 1:10 AM
|> 
|> Thursday, Thursday, October 04, 2001, 12:37:25 AM, Philip 
|> Sheppard wrote:
|> 
|> > Joanna,
|> 
|> > I would not read too much into the appearance of agenda 
|> item 8 about the
|> > recall of the GA chair. I do not expect a vote to be taken 
|> on this item. All
|> 
|> How unfortunate that the Names Council doesn't take the paralysis of
|> the GA as a result of lack of an effective Chair seriously enough to
|> want to act to resolve it so that the GA can become effective and
|> productive.

It would appear that the request has not much backing. The GA was paralyzed
most of last year as well. I see nothing more than a contiuation of the
same, unfortunately. A good part of that has nothing to do with the chair
and more with the structure of the DNSO. A lack of power will inevitably
lead to a certain lack of focus. This has always been there and is a direct
result of the nature of the GA. A new chair would not solve that problem. It
might even exacerbate the problem, given the timing.

|> Does the Names Council not want the GA to be strong and effective?

That's a trick-question, right?
- --
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: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 18:45:35 +1000
From: "Dassa" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] NC agenda and Recall of GA Chair

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
|> Roeland Meyer
|> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 6:34 PM
|> To: 'William X Walsh'; Philip Sheppard
|> Cc: [email-masked]; NC (list)
|> Subject: RE: [ga] NC agenda and Recall of GA Chair
|>
|> It would appear that the request has not much backing. The GA
|> was paralyzed most of last year as well. I see nothing more than a
contiuation of the
|> same, unfortunately. A good part of that has nothing to do with the chair
|> and more with the structure of the DNSO.

Personally, I believe the GA requires a very strong and dedicated person in
the Chair.  Nothing against our current Chair and  my observation is, he
does try.  I do consider he is not the right person for the job at this
time.  Perhaps there isn't another who is.  I would hope someone who can
actually drive the GA forward in the correct manner would step up to the
plate however.  At the very least, another person would be given the chance
to show if they have the necessary skills, knowledge and other requirements
to get the GA functioning as it should.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

- --
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: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 05:43:57 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: Recall of GA Chair

Philip,

Where is the Timeline for the current meeting Agenda, the deadline for IC
input, the deadline to post to the NC and the deadline for papers? All of
these should have been posted with the draft agenda prior to announcement
being made to the NC and GA, shouldn't they?

According to the agreed rules, "The Intake Committee shall have the sole
discretion to deviate from these procedures when externalities dictate."
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00026.html

When exactly did the Intake Committee agree to your deviation from
procedures? Exactly what are the externalities that dictated the decision to
add to the agenda so late and without any discussion with any member of the
IC? I would have thought externalities would dictate item 8 as "Election of
new Intake Committee Chair".

Also in the rules, "Last minute. In case of issues arising subsequent to the
above timetable, NC members will be able to propose items for any other
business at the start of an NC meeting. Such items will be accepted for
discussion that day or deferred to the IC at the discretion of the NC chair.
" http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00048.html

Did you consider discussing William Walsh's comment in AOB, or deferring it
to the IC for discussion at all?

It is evident that you have vigorously enforced intake committee procedures
in the past. For example, you wrote:-

1) "Please let me have your agreement today Monday
September 25 as the period of notice for the next meeting expires Wednesday
28 September !" http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00068.html

2) "In order to give sufficient notice to NC members and to allow time for
consultation within constituencies items must be submitted 21 days before
the date of the meeting.
This time limit has passed for the 19 October meeting.  We welcome your
input now and up to 24 October 2000 for the Names Council meeting of 14
November 2000." http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00075.html

3)   
 "Timeline
        o Agenda input closes 3 January 2001
        o IC submits draft agenda to chair latest 9 January
        o Chair amends/approves and Secretary posts to NC latest 10 January
        o Agenda item documents sent to NC latest 17 January"
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00180.html

4) "Note we are late with the timetable and should post to the NC today. So,
please comments on the agenda by Paris time 16.00 Feb 13.
Philip " http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00206.html

5) "I am travelling a lot next week and will miss the 25 April deadline for
posting the agenda to the NC. So please post this agenda below. The Intake
Committee may still have changes and I can take them when I return."
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00238.html

With so many pressing issues to address in numerous Task Forces on which you
sit, not to mention the additional burden of the Board's directive to focus
on security issues, could a few things be falling through the net because
you are spreading yourself too thin?

Regards,
Joanna Lane

From: "Philip Sheppard" <[email-masked]>
Organization: AIM
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 09:37:25 +0200
To: "Joanna Lane" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>, "NC \(list\)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: NC agenda and Recall of GA Chair

Joanna,

I would not read too much into the appearance of agenda item 8 about the
recall of the GA chair. I do not expect a vote to be taken on this item. All
that has happened is that a member of the GA felt strongly enough to request
a recall and it seemed inappropriate to ignore this."

"And please do not get too entangled in NC rules and procedures. We have
written some guidelines to help ensure that advance notice is given on
complex issues so that constituencies can debate them and give guidance to
their reps before an NC meeting. Some times these time limits are met, some
times not - they are guidelines not statutes, designed to help us not bind
us.

Philip

on 10/4/01 2:23 AM, Joanna Lane at [email-masked] wrote:

> On a point of order, item 8, Recall of GA Chair, should not be included as
> an Agenda item for the Oct 11 NC meeting as this item was submitted too late
> to the Intake Committee - 17 days prior to the next meeting, which is less
> than the 21 days required by its adopted rules.
> 
> The basis for this item's inclusion on the NC agenda item would appear to
> amount to a single complaint by one person of the GA. To use Philip
> Shepard's own words to the Intake Committee regarding NC procedures,
> "Remember, each agenda will have a hyperlink to the e-mail input for that
> agenda, so anyone can follow the correspondence if they want to spend the
> time." http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00056.html. There
> are no hyperlinks for this agenda item because there has been no e-mail
> input and therefore, no matter how much time NC members may be willing and
> able to put into it, it would be a complete waste of their time.
> 
> For your further information, the e-mail history is as follows:-
> 
> On Sept 23, William X Walsh posted a comment to the General Assembly mailing
> list requesting a recall of the GA Chair position, copied to the NC Chair.
> 
> On Sept 24, Philip Shepard forwarded the aforementioned comment by William
> Walsh to the Intake Committee mailing list.
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00306.html.
> 
> On Sept 26, Philip Shepard posted a draft agenda for Oct 11 NC meeting, in
> which Recall of GA Chair appears as item 8.
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00309.html. In
> consideration of recent events and priorities dictated by the same, serious
> consideration of the Intake Committee was not given to this late addition.
> 
> On Oct 1st, Philip Shepard instructed the Secretariat to announce the NC Oct
> 11 meeting agenda, including item 8.
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00312.html
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Joanna Lane
> 
> --
> 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: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 09:36:38 -0400
From: "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] RE: Recall of GA Chair

Joanna and Philip:

In the interests of eliminating what I consider to be time-wasting
discussion about procedures, If Philip wishes to withdraw the agenda
item from the published list, then I will bring it up under AOB at the
next NC meeting myself.

That way, we can move on, and hopefully use this list for more
substantive work.

As I said in a previous post, my inclination, as a NC member, would be
to return the request to the GA based on lack of consensus on the
"motion". In fact, it is not even a motion. So far I have seen only one
or two "partial agreements" to WXW suggestion.

If the GA wishes a new chair, it can decide that on its own. And to me,
that means at least 51% of the persons who have posted to the GA list in
the last 3 months would need to express such a desire.

Peter de Blanc

- -----Original Message-----
From: Joanna Lane [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 5:44 AM
To: Joanna Lane; Peter de Blanc; 'Jeff Williams'; 'Joop Teernstra'; Paul
M. Kane; Philip Shepard
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Recall of GA Chair

Philip,

Where is the Timeline for the current meeting Agenda, the deadline for
IC input, the deadline to post to the NC and the deadline for papers?
All of these should have been posted with the draft agenda prior to
announcement being made to the NC and GA, shouldn't they?

According to the agreed rules, "The Intake Committee shall have the sole
discretion to deviate from these procedures when externalities dictate."
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00026.html

When exactly did the Intake Committee agree to your deviation from
procedures? Exactly what are the externalities that dictated the
decision to add to the agenda so late and without any discussion with
any member of the IC? I would have thought externalities would dictate
item 8 as "Election of new Intake Committee Chair".

Also in the rules, "Last minute. In case of issues arising subsequent to
the above timetable, NC members will be able to propose items for any
other business at the start of an NC meeting. Such items will be
accepted for discussion that day or deferred to the IC at the discretion
of the NC chair. "
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00048.html

Did you consider discussing William Walsh's comment in AOB, or deferring
it to the IC for discussion at all?

It is evident that you have vigorously enforced intake committee
procedures in the past. For example, you wrote:-

1) "Please let me have your agreement today Monday
September 25 as the period of notice for the next meeting expires
Wednesday 28 September !"
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00068.html

2) "In order to give sufficient notice to NC members and to allow time
for consultation within constituencies items must be submitted 21 days
before the date of the meeting. This time limit has passed for the 19
October meeting.  We welcome your input now and up to 24 October 2000
for the Names Council meeting of 14 November 2000."
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00075.html

3)   
 "Timeline
        o Agenda input closes 3 January 2001
        o IC submits draft agenda to chair latest 9 January
        o Chair amends/approves and Secretary posts to NC latest 10
January
        o Agenda item documents sent to NC latest 17 January"
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00180.html

4) "Note we are late with the timetable and should post to the NC today.
So, please comments on the agenda by Paris time 16.00 Feb 13. Philip "
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00206.html

5) "I am travelling a lot next week and will miss the 25 April deadline
for posting the agenda to the NC. So please post this agenda below. The
Intake Committee may still have changes and I can take them when I
return." http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00238.html

With so many pressing issues to address in numerous Task Forces on which
you sit, not to mention the additional burden of the Board's directive
to focus on security issues, could a few things be falling through the
net because you are spreading yourself too thin?

Regards,
Joanna Lane

From: "Philip Sheppard" <[email-masked]>
Organization: AIM
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 09:37:25 +0200
To: "Joanna Lane" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>, "NC \(list\)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: NC agenda and Recall of GA Chair

Joanna,

I would not read too much into the appearance of agenda item 8 about the
recall of the GA chair. I do not expect a vote to be taken on this item.
All that has happened is that a member of the GA felt strongly enough to
request a recall and it seemed inappropriate to ignore this."

"And please do not get too entangled in NC rules and procedures. We have
written some guidelines to help ensure that advance notice is given on
complex issues so that constituencies can debate them and give guidance
to their reps before an NC meeting. Some times these time limits are
met, some times not - they are guidelines not statutes, designed to help
us not bind us.

Philip

on 10/4/01 2:23 AM, Joanna Lane at [email-masked] wrote:

> On a point of order, item 8, Recall of GA Chair, should not be 
> included as an Agenda item for the Oct 11 NC meeting as this item was 
> submitted too late to the Intake Committee - 17 days prior to the next

> meeting, which is less than the 21 days required by its adopted rules.
> 
> The basis for this item's inclusion on the NC agenda item would appear

> to amount to a single complaint by one person of the GA. To use Philip

> Shepard's own words to the Intake Committee regarding NC procedures, 
> "Remember, each agenda will have a hyperlink to the e-mail input for 
> that agenda, so anyone can follow the correspondence if they want to 
> spend the time." 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00056.html. There 
> are no hyperlinks for this agenda item because there has been no 
> e-mail input and therefore, no matter how much time NC members may be 
> willing and able to put into it, it would be a complete waste of their

> time.
> 
> For your further information, the e-mail history is as follows:-
> 
> On Sept 23, William X Walsh posted a comment to the General Assembly 
> mailing list requesting a recall of the GA Chair position, copied to 
> the NC Chair.
> 
> On Sept 24, Philip Shepard forwarded the aforementioned comment by 
> William Walsh to the Intake Committee mailing list. 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00306.html.
> 
> On Sept 26, Philip Shepard posted a draft agenda for Oct 11 NC 
> meeting, in which Recall of GA Chair appears as item 8. 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00309.html. In 
> consideration of recent events and priorities dictated by the same, 
> serious consideration of the Intake Committee was not given to this 
> late addition.
> 
> On Oct 1st, Philip Shepard instructed the Secretariat to announce the 
> NC Oct 11 meeting agenda, including item 8. 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00312.html
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Joanna Lane
> 
> --
> 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: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 09:43:06 -0400
From: Dan Steinberg <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Recall of GA Chair

ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm this is no reflection on Joanna or any other individual post.
Hers just happened to be the latest I found in the thread.  But I have been
following this debate from the sidelines, which is where I usually stay for what I
perceive to be politically-motivated threads. Last night, I stopped to count the
number of posts in this 'recall' thread. I quickly gave up.
Are there not at least a  few more pressing agendas for the GA?

More specifically, I'm out there as a GA rep on the UDRP task force. So far, not
much has happened and because of the way the task force is structured it is
unlikely there will be anything requiring me to report back on and request GA
consensus in a timely manner. Quite simply we are preparing a questionnaire based
on existing terms of reference. The substantive issues will come from entities
that repsond to the questionnaire, not from the task force participants.

Just in case, if I have something to report that requires immediate action by the
GA (like consensus on an issue), can I count ou you all for a quick turnaround?

thanks in advance

Joanna Lane wrote:

> Philip,
>
> Where is the Timeline for the current meeting Agenda, the deadline for IC
> input, the deadline to post to the NC and the deadline for papers? All of
> these should have been posted with the draft agenda prior to announcement
> being made to the NC and GA, shouldn't they?
>
> According to the agreed rules, "The Intake Committee shall have the sole
> discretion to deviate from these procedures when externalities dictate."
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00026.html
>
> When exactly did the Intake Committee agree to your deviation from
> procedures? Exactly what are the externalities that dictated the decision to
> add to the agenda so late and without any discussion with any member of the
> IC? I would have thought externalities would dictate item 8 as "Election of
> new Intake Committee Chair".
>
> Also in the rules, "Last minute. In case of issues arising subsequent to the
> above timetable, NC members will be able to propose items for any other
> business at the start of an NC meeting. Such items will be accepted for
> discussion that day or deferred to the IC at the discretion of the NC chair.
> " http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00048.html
>
> Did you consider discussing William Walsh's comment in AOB, or deferring it
> to the IC for discussion at all?
>
> It is evident that you have vigorously enforced intake committee procedures
> in the past. For example, you wrote:-
>
> 1) "Please let me have your agreement today Monday
> September 25 as the period of notice for the next meeting expires Wednesday
> 28 September !" http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00068.html
>
> 2) "In order to give sufficient notice to NC members and to allow time for
> consultation within constituencies items must be submitted 21 days before
> the date of the meeting.
> This time limit has passed for the 19 October meeting.  We welcome your
> input now and up to 24 October 2000 for the Names Council meeting of 14
> November 2000." http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00075.html
>
> 3)
>  "Timeline
>         o Agenda input closes 3 January 2001
>         o IC submits draft agenda to chair latest 9 January
>         o Chair amends/approves and Secretary posts to NC latest 10 January
>         o Agenda item documents sent to NC latest 17 January"
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00180.html
>
> 4) "Note we are late with the timetable and should post to the NC today. So,
> please comments on the agenda by Paris time 16.00 Feb 13.
> Philip " http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00206.html
>
> 5) "I am travelling a lot next week and will miss the 25 April deadline for
> posting the agenda to the NC. So please post this agenda below. The Intake
> Committee may still have changes and I can take them when I return."
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00238.html
>
> With so many pressing issues to address in numerous Task Forces on which you
> sit, not to mention the additional burden of the Board's directive to focus
> on security issues, could a few things be falling through the net because
> you are spreading yourself too thin?
>
> Regards,
> Joanna Lane
>
> From: "Philip Sheppard" <[email-masked]>
> Organization: AIM
> Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 09:37:25 +0200
> To: "Joanna Lane" <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>, "NC \(list\)" <[email-masked]>
> Subject: NC agenda and Recall of GA Chair
>
> Joanna,
>
> I would not read too much into the appearance of agenda item 8 about the
> recall of the GA chair. I do not expect a vote to be taken on this item. All
> that has happened is that a member of the GA felt strongly enough to request
> a recall and it seemed inappropriate to ignore this."
>
> "And please do not get too entangled in NC rules and procedures. We have
> written some guidelines to help ensure that advance notice is given on
> complex issues so that constituencies can debate them and give guidance to
> their reps before an NC meeting. Some times these time limits are met, some
> times not - they are guidelines not statutes, designed to help us not bind
> us.
>
> Philip
>
> on 10/4/01 2:23 AM, Joanna Lane at [email-masked] wrote:
>
> > On a point of order, item 8, Recall of GA Chair, should not be included as
> > an Agenda item for the Oct 11 NC meeting as this item was submitted too late
> > to the Intake Committee - 17 days prior to the next meeting, which is less
> > than the 21 days required by its adopted rules.
> >
> > The basis for this item's inclusion on the NC agenda item would appear to
> > amount to a single complaint by one person of the GA. To use Philip
> > Shepard's own words to the Intake Committee regarding NC procedures,
> > "Remember, each agenda will have a hyperlink to the e-mail input for that
> > agenda, so anyone can follow the correspondence if they want to spend the
> > time." http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00056.html. There
> > are no hyperlinks for this agenda item because there has been no e-mail
> > input and therefore, no matter how much time NC members may be willing and
> > able to put into it, it would be a complete waste of their time.
> >
> > For your further information, the e-mail history is as follows:-
> >
> > On Sept 23, William X Walsh posted a comment to the General Assembly mailing
> > list requesting a recall of the GA Chair position, copied to the NC Chair.
> >
> > On Sept 24, Philip Shepard forwarded the aforementioned comment by William
> > Walsh to the Intake Committee mailing list.
> > http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00306.html.
> >
> > On Sept 26, Philip Shepard posted a draft agenda for Oct 11 NC meeting, in
> > which Recall of GA Chair appears as item 8.
> > http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00309.html. In
> > consideration of recent events and priorities dictated by the same, serious
> > consideration of the Intake Committee was not given to this late addition.
> >
> > On Oct 1st, Philip Shepard instructed the Secretariat to announce the NC Oct
> > 11 meeting agenda, including item 8.
> > http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00312.html
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Joanna Lane
> >
> > --
> > 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

- --
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin  phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec  fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:[email-masked]

- --
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: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 16:46:38 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] FW: Proposed Legislation Significantly Affecting Compute r Profess ion (46637)

On 06:22 04/10/01, Roeland Meyer said:
>|> From: Jefsey Morfin [mailto:[email-masked]]
>|> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 8:14 PM
>|>
>|> On 02:22 04/10/01, Roeland Meyer said:
>|> >Jefsey may theorize on his conspiracies, yet miss the real
>|> background
>|> >agendii. What direction did Stuart receive from the DoC
>|> recently? These
>|> >elephants are much larger than Jefsey's old fish.
>|>
>|> which conspiracies and old fish ;-) ?
>|>
>|> 1. Imperial Republic
>|> 2. big business interests
>|> 3. job protection
>|> 4. money
>
>None of the above. The USG is going to take back the Internet. But, that's
>only my opinion. More imnportantly, they are going to impose a bunch of
>stuff that will ruin it for business use, in the name of increased security.

Who do you think the "Imperial Republic" is :-) ????
Neither the United States of Australia nor the Union Sud-Africaine ...   :-)
Cheers!

PS. You did not quote back the most important part of my mail. Happily all 
of them misunderstand the Internet from the very beginning (they take it 
for what they wanted, not for what was built). You cannot "take back" the 
Internet. They Internet does not exist and never was theirs. It is like 
Chinese "taking back" the Chinese language.

Again, the Internet is OUR consensus to interconnect OUR machines using the 
TC/IP protocol set and the IP and domain naming plans. The management of 
this consensus of OURS is OUR Internet governance, gathering those feeling 
concerned (@large). We organize OUR governance to OUR OWN benefit through 
OUR dedicated interest structures (constituencies, working groups, 
associations etc... ) for OUR "netwide" concerns, and at individual level 
for the representation of OUR individual, noncomm or business interests, in 
relation with OUR national bodies (Gov, NICs, Dedicated Interest Groups 
national chapters).

The place of the USG as the place of every other government and governance 
center is well defined. Even if some are more equal han others, even in an 
interconnect.This is the way the system is.

I fully accept the human nature loves curbing reality to its own fancies. 
The is an obvious mission creep at dominance by the ICANN for various 
motives. You are right the USG is sponsoring it as do the others (big 
business, job protection, money). The impact can certainly be serious. For 
the worst if the US society in general falls in the terrorists' trap, for 
the better I feel otherwise.

If you look at the international situation since the 11th Sept, you will 
notice that the USG has learned a lot. And if you look at History, 
communication routes have mostly been open, built and enlarged by 
militaries. I would certainly welcome NATO professionals to take over what 
our ICANN amateurish crowd has failed. At least for a time. Rough, 
entertaining, but globally positive.

- --
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 #774
************************