Michael and all,
Again the call made here by Michael Sondow that has been repeated
over and over again sense the beginning of this ICANN process ring
out clearly and concisely. The PROCESS must have a method of
quantification. This has been missing from the beginning of the
ICANN and White Paper process. WE, the stake holders must be the ones
deciding collectively what policies will be adopted. NOT the ICANN
Interim Board. This was made clear some months back from the NTIA.
It appears however that the ICANN Interim Board decided early on to
head that type of PROCESS off through the insistence of Mike Roberts.
Until or unless the ICANN PROCESS is redirected in the direction of
the will of the stakeholders, we will have no resolution to solving the
perceived and real concerns through policy determination...
Michael Sondow wrote:
> Reading, even answering remote messages is not enough. There must be
> a mechanism for online voting, and all representatives, whether of
> constituencies, the SOs, or the board itself, must be elected by a
> fully democratic process that includes all interested stakeholders,
> whether present at the meetings or not. That is the only way to
> prevent capture. It is still not too late to put such democratic
> remote voting mechanisms into place. But it soon will be, and then
> this whole process of creating the NewCo without direct universal
> stakeholder suffrage will have been reduced to a grand capture by
> vested interests.
>
> Esther Dyson a �crit:
> >
> > This is not true. I did indeed mention the opposition to moving fast on
> > WIPO, several times, and read several comments, esp. Froomkin's, which was
> > one of the primary substantive ones, and noted the disparity in support for
> > individual members from outside the room.
> >
> > But yes, I (taking responsibility)/we (it's a team effort) will do it
> > better next time. See next message (later).
> >
> > Esther
> >
> > At 03:45 PM 28/05/99 -0400, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> > >I tired my best. You'll note that about 4:12 pm on wednesday I asked her
> > >to read them and she wouldnt. I don't think "having the scribes
> > >prepare summaries of the remote comments" counts as "remote participation".
> > >
> > >
> > >At 09:58 PM 5/27/99 -0400, you wrote:
> > >>Diane C wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>I forgot to mention that the comments that come in from people listening
> > >>>to the
> > >>>webcasts are also read to the assembly.
> > >>
> > >>Only on the first day. On the second day, Esther promised several times
> > >>that she would "get to" the written comments from the webcast, but she
> > >>never really did. There was a passing few notices of the support for the
> > >>Individual constituency, but VERY little mention of the serious opposition
> > >>to the WIPO proposal provided by the webcast viewers.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >--
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >Remember, amateurs built the Ark. Professionals built the Titanic.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > 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 http://www.icann.org
> >
> > High-Tech Forum in Europe: 24 to 26 October 1999, Budapest
> > PC Forum: March 12 to 15, 2000, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
> > Book: "Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age"
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
