[ncdnhc-discuss] GA on new Blueprint for changes in GA

[James Love]

Well, the GA just concluded the discussion the blueprint proposals to 
eliminate elections for the GA chair to to prevent the GA from having votes 
on anything.   Alexander Svensson asked for discussion.  I was the *only* 
person to speak on this issue, and indeed, all morning I believe there has 
only between two or three other persons making any comments from the floor 
on anything.  This has been the quietest GA meeting I have ever seen.  No 
one else from the NCC or the at large spoke from the floor.

My point was that ICANN was seeking to eliminate every opportunity for 
ordinary people to register disagreement with the ICANN board positions. 
The elimination of at large elections was also part of this.

With respect to the GA votes on the two motions asking for a rebid (the 
blunt and more "diplomatic" version), Alexander did not mention either 
motion in his presentation, even though he had opposed having the votes 
earlier, on the grounds that it would lead to the elimination of the GA. 
[Interesting note: apparently Paul Twomey did not allow the GAC to discuss 
the GA vote during the GAC meeting, it has become an official non-event) 
Now we are in  a situation where the GA will be changed in such a way that 
the public will not be able to choose its leader, there will be no 
unmoderated discussions, and no votes on anything.

In my opinion, the value of the GA being able to elect its own leaders and 
to register its own independent views is to provide evidence that the ICANN 
board is out of step with the Internet community (when this happens), and to 
prevent the ICANN board from claiming a global consensus, when they don't 
have one.  It's a saftey value and a modest system for accountability, which 
apparently is why is being eliminated.

Jamie

------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love at cptech.org
voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040