[ncdnhc-discuss] Resolution on ORG Divestiture

[George Sadowsky]

Milton,

I believe that there are a significant number of lurkers on this list 
who generally say little, if anything at all.  That's why this 
electronic conversation looks like a small group discussion from the 
outside, with the same few people participating.

I think you may mistake silence for acquiescence.  That's often a 
convenient thing to do if it's your point of view that you assume is 
being acquiesced to.

Silence can also be observed on the part of the 99.99% of 
not-for-profit organizations, potential members of the constituency, 
who either do not know about this list or consider it not worth their 
attention.  It's an incredible stretch from the very beginning to 
assert that NCDNHC has any legitimate standing whatsoever with 
respect to this constituency.  I am sure that the ICANN Board is 
quite aware of this; do you think about this from time to time?

I do not represent any member of NCDNHC, although I enrolled my 
former employer, New York University, several years ago before really 
understanding what the potential output of this group could be.

As a lurker, my own silence has meant an unwillingness to get 
involved in discussions that I thought were relatively meaningless, a 
defensive kind of silence, to be aware if this group was going to do 
any significant harm to anything I valued.  My few interventions left 
me with the feeling that I was not adding anything in the way of 
progress, and I was better off as a lurker.

What I observe recently is a disregard for dealing with dissent in a 
manner that forms coalitions of people working for a common 
objective, a disdainful attitude that dismisses disagreement, and an 
almost pompous assurance that one is right, no matter what the 
opposing opinions.

Some of this is due to the imperfect nature of lists for holding 
group discussions.  Some of it is due to personalities.  Not enough 
of it is due to the nature of issues.

I will be at ICANN in Los Angeles, and I look forward to observing 
how you all interact in face to face discussions, that is, if the 
group will let me join their meeting.

George Sadowsky


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


At 5:09 PM -0700 10/25/01, Dave Crocker wrote:
>At 03:45 PM 10/25/2001, Milton Mueller wrote:
>>Anupam:
>>I am surprised that anyone is falling for Vany's call for a "special" vote.
>
>Milton, your respect for opinions and positions that differ from 
>yours remains a hallmark.
>
>>There is a formal resolution on ORG submitted. It will be discussed 
>>and debated
>>in the ICANN meeting (where it can be amended and compromises worked out
>>more easily) and then submitted to the entire membership online, where
>>it can be discussed and amended again, or voted down, if necessary.
>>
>>We have established procedures for doing these things.
>
>You seem to misunderstand the procedures, Milton.
>
>There is nothing in them that mandates having a first vote only at a 
>face to face meeting.
>
>There is nothing that mandates having no discussion until a face to 
>face meeting.
>
>>last two years is that people who can make
>>a lot of noise on an email list may have very
>>little support from the membership as a whole.
>
>Indeed.  So why is it, Milton, that you persist in making so much 
>noise on this email list?
>
>d/
>
>----------
>Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
>Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
>tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464
>