Hi Esther and all ...
Thanks for clearly stating that you support our continued work on
finding ways to meld the better parts of both proposals into something
that will obtain greater consensus support than either of them do by
themselves.
We need to be very careful to understand that they correct process is
not for the proponents of one of the applications to knock the other
out of the box.
As one of the Paris Draft supporters, I will commit myself to work
with my ORSC collegues to work positively with the other proponents to
find ways to accomplish the meld without compromising commonly held
values of all parties.
Among the things that I think might be very helpful at this point
would be to fall back to reviewing what our commonly held values are
in order to work down from the common meta values level to the details
of a final broad based consensus plan.
It is going to be very difficlut to work up from differing detail
bases! So, lets work down from the meta level.
As John Gall says in Meta Strategy Number V. in his book,
SYMTEMANTICS, Appendix I, PAGE 195:
"IF YOUR PROBLEM SEEMS UNSOLVABLE,
CONSIDER THAT YOU MAY HAVE A META PROBLEM".
Best...\Stef
>From Esther's message Mon, 8 Feb 1999 10:01:39 -0500:
}
}We'll be posting the two DNSO proposals we received for public comment on
}our Website today, along with the much-awaited proposed accreditation
}guidelines for the shared registry system - also for public comment. That's
}as a prelude to the open meeting and our baord meeting in Singapore.
}
}What do we do with the two proposals? We try to figure out how to get you
}all to merge them into something that satisfies most people, without us
}dictating the terms. February 5 was a real date, in terms of formal filing
}of proposals. But there's a month (roughly) for public comment which all
}(including the Initial Board) can participate in. Subsequent compromise
}wording, expressions of support, and the like all matter in the Initial
}Board's decision.
}
}Esther Dyson
}
}At 06:52 AM 08/02/99 -0500, Andrew Q. Kraft, MAIP, Executive Director wrote:
}>Esther,
}>
}>I am writing to ask you a two brief but important questions:
}>
}>1) Will there be some official notice letting those of us who submitted
}>proposals (and the public) as to which proposals did make it in by the
}>deadline and are thus under consideration?
}>
}>2) As there are at LEAST two proposals on the table (DNSO.org/INTA and the
}>Paris Draft), How does ICANN plan to proceed from here?
}>
}>Clearly its only Monday morning here on the East Coast of the United States
}>and there hasn't been a business working day since the drafts went out, but
}>it would be nice to know where things stand as early this week as possible.
}>
}>AIP will be sending two members of our DNSO team (Chair Mitch Ahern and
}>leader of our drafting team Bret Fausett) to Singapore, while I stay back to
}>hold down the fort in the U.S.
}>
}>I hope to continue working with you and ICANN on this process moving
}>forward.
}>
}>I look forward to your reply.
}>
}>Sincerely,
}>Andrew Kraft
}>--
}>Andrew Q. Kraft, MAIP
}>Executive Director, Association of Internet Professionals (AIP)
}>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
}>Phone: 310-724-6589
}>More Info: http://www.association.org/
}>
}>
}
}
}Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes!
}chairman, EDventure Holdings
}interim chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
}[EMAIL PROTECTED]
}1 (212) 924-8800
}1 (212) 924-0240 fax
}104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
}New York, NY 10011 USA
}http://www.edventure.com
}
}PC Forum: 21 to 24 March 1999, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
}High-Tech Forum in Europe: 24 to 26 October 1999, Budapest
}Book: "Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age"
}
}
