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

[KathrynKL at aol.com]

Jamie wrote from Bucharest:
<<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 safety value and a modest system for accountability, which 
apparently is why is being eliminated.>>

Jamie: I agree completely with everything you say below about the GA and its 
value as part of the DNSO and ICANN.  When the DNSO was originally designed, 
everyone realized that our noncommercial voice was outnumbered 6:1 in the 
constituencies.  

The GA was offered to us as a place where other voices, particularly 
individual and noncommercial domain name holders, could be heard.  As I sat 
for two terms in the Names Council, the terrible imbalance of the 
Constituencies became even more clear -- on issues and elections of leading 
trademark attorneys to the ICANN Board.  We needed the GA voice for balance. 

But the GA was lost for a long time, with no one knowing how to organize it.  
Jamie, you showed the GA how to find its voice and take its rightful place in 
the DNSO.   Your work was incredible and allowed ICANN to hear clearly from 
users whose voice was kept silence in other parts of the ICANN process.  
Thank you!  But the GA's place on the map has made it a target for 
destruction.  I believe that ICANN's elimination of the GA's tools 
(strawpolls) and voice is so fundamentally wrong that it is grounds in itself 
for the rebid of ICANN. 

kathy kleiman 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20020626/0c2b177d/attachment-0001.html>