A bit more complication: 
(a) I don't believe everyone wants to be involved in a meeting at which the
ICANN Board decides which vendors to use, where the parking places
should be, etc. (These examples are of course highly exaggerated.) The 
poll might qualify its meaning of ICANN BOARD MEETINGS to mean 
those, I assume, of a fundamental policy nature.

(b) Should this group establish a CHARTER so that all of us are working
off the same page? 

I've just browsed a few of the web pages kindly provided by Jeff Williams 
and while much is said about the functional mechanics, I see very little 
in any of them along the line of "in order that . . . ."  What?

I suspect that (a) everyone involved here has an answer, but (b) the
content of those answers would vary all over the map. Again, I'm suggesting
that ALL of the authentication, registration, who does what, etc., etc.,
would be more easily answered if the specific purpose to be served by
the answer to each question were agreed upon in advance, and the only
way I know how to do that is to have a Charter that would include the
usual "Enhance the functioning and operation of the international Internet
community," blah, blah, but there are principles of equal protection,
comity, transnational legal differences, etc., that should be recognized
and spelled out as problems that the group would address. Whether or
not ICANN is aware of it or not, the fact remains that all such issues are 
part of the pot being stirred here -- issues that will bear on all of the more
specific topics currently under discussion. So I suggest that if you know 
WHY you want to do something, that goes a long way towards showing 
you HOW  to do it.  Whether anyone agrees with that is worth knowing,
I suspect, and for that reason I suggest sticking it into the poll. (I concur
with the addition proposed below.)

Bill Lovell

>Ellen Rony wrote:
>
>> Michael Sondow wrote:
>>
>> >ICANN BOARD MEETINGS SHOULD BE:      [  ] OPEN          [  ] CLOSED
>> >
>> >THE SOs SHOULD:    [  ] INCORPORATE      [  ] NOT INCORPORATE
>>
>> *Much* better!  Thanks.
>>
>> Let's add:
>>
>> * ICANN MEMBERSHIP SHOULD BE:   [  ] FLAT/AT LARGE   [  ] CONSTITUENCY-BASED
>>                                 [  ] OTHER MODEL
>>
>>   or whatever words accurately describe the current options under
discussion.
>>


__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________

Reply via email to