William and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On 10-Feb-99 Mike Roberts wrote:
> > With respect to the rest of the email, you present a compelling
> > case for your vision of the future of the Internet name and
> > address system. However, it is your case and your opinion,
> > to which you are richly entitled in our democracy. Others
> > may have other views and reach other conclusions. It seems
> > to me to be unreasonable for you to conclude, with a lot of
> > value laden adjectives, that those who may disagree with you
> > are less worthy of having their opinions heard in the councils
> > and public processes of ICANN. Gordon and others have been
> > critical of the SJ Mercury article quotation in which I said
> > that critics of ICANN needed to distinguish between being heard
> > and having their way. This is the essence of the kind of
> > republican democracy we have in the United States. It's going
> > on right now in the Senate. The House Republicans have been
> > heard, and their assertions are being weighed and measured
> > by the Senate and a vote will follow. The ICANN Board's duty
> > is to HEAR everyone who wishes to be heard and then to DECIDE.
> > Those who are "affected" and aggrieved by Board decisions not
> > only have our reconsideration policy as a remedy [see post of
> > draft policy from yesterday on our Web site], they obviously
> > have recourse to the courts, which we are frequently reminded of,
> > most recently this morning.
>
> First of all Mr Roberts, I'd like to say I am appreciative of your joining in
> on the discussions here on the list. I think it is a great step for you to
> take, and I hope to see it continue. I may help build more trust in this
> process.
>
> I would also like to point out one part of a republican democracy, is that the
> governors rule with the consent of the governed, and as such is obligated to
> give an increased weight to their opinions and comments.
Not only is this true, but on some very important considerations such as
accreditation, referendum voting is often necessary to determine what
the will of the people truly, as more often than not, representatives do
not consent to the will of the people, or even give a dam.
>
>
> To paraphrase Dr Lyman Hall, delegate from Georgia to the Second Continental
> Congress in 1776, when considering whether to vote for or againt independence,
> where he personally agreed with it, the people were opposed to it, and until he
> worked out exactly where his responsibility to the people layed, he was better
> to err on the side of the people.
Good point here William. Yet we find it extrodinarly ironic that you don't
practice or at least practice what you preach.
>
>
> I would apply this to the current situation by saying that until ICANN is
> formally established in its roles, and an actual board is in place, the
> leadership would do well to heed the consensus of the participants over their
> own personal opinions. This is not about you or Esther or the other board
> members. It is about your responsibility to us, and all who make up the vast
> term stakeholder.
>
> Please keep that in mind when you recommend and implement policy, especially
> when you elect to do so without significant input from us.
One cannot expect for an APPOINTED ICANN "Initial" and Interim board
would adhere to this sort of reasonable process to arrive at a solution
to a considerable concern of the Stakeholders.
>
>
> ----------------------------------
> E-Mail: William X. Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 09-Feb-99
> Time: 19:26:10
> ----------------------------------
> "We may well be on our way to a society overrun by hordes
> of lawyers, hungry as locusts."
> - Chief Justice Warren Burger, US Supreme Court, 1977
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
