[governance] Reinstate the Vote

[Danny Younger]

Kieren,

If you regard this as an ad hominen attack, then
perhaps a brief vacation to settle your nerves might
be in order.

regards,
Danny



--- Kieren McCarthy <kierenmccarthy at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ad hominem attack.
> 
> 
> 
> Kieren
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger at yahoo.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 5:07 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kieren McCarthy
> Subject: RE: [governance] Reinstate the Vote
> 
> Kieren,
> 
> You know, you really should make an effort to read
> the
> public comments submitted once in a while...
> 
> I earlier proposed a "solution" within the public
> comment submitted at this URL:  
>
http://forum.icann.org/lists/naralo-comments/msg00006.html
> 
> Here's the gist of it:
> 
> A readily-implemented, low-cost solution to seat
> at-large directors on the ICANN board.
> 
> The solution:
> 
> Those directors that are not currently elected by
> ICANN's Supporting Organizations come to the board
> by
> way of ICANN's "Nominating Committee", a body
> populated exclusively by special-interest
> representatives.
> 
> This committee must be eliminated and must be
> replaced
> by a new committee populated exclusively by
> public-interest representatives.  These
> representatives will be drawn from the pool of
> candidates that previously stood for at-large
> election.  These voices of the public will then,
> through the same set of processes used by the
> current
> Nominating Committee, select the slate of at-large
> directors that will take their seats on the ICANN
> board (and ICANN will thereby finally come to honor
> the principle of balanced representation).
> 
> By the way, I see nothing wrong with the notion of
> the
> Chairman asking "So how do we fix this?".  Prior
> Boards chose to put together blue-ribbon panels to
> study an issue (like Carl Bildt's ALSC that arrived
> at
> a consensus-based recommendation to have the
> at-large
> seated on one third of the Board).  Unfortunately,
> we
> have been blessed with boards whose wisdom is
> superior
> to that of the commmunity and who feel quite
> comfortable rejecting consensus-based
> determinations.
> 
> Who knows... perhaps one day you might be heralded
> as
> the ICANN Manager of Public Representation instead
> of
> as a functionary that is charged with pushing the
> prospect of feeble "participation" onto those that
> instead are screaming for accountability via true
> multistakeholder representation.  Time will tell.
> 
> best wishes,
> and again thanks for your perspective.
> 
> 
> --- Kieren McCarthy <kierenmccarthy at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > I understand where you're coming from Danny. But
> you
> > asked me what the best
> > method was and that's the answer.
> > 
> > What you are assuming, wrongly in my view, is that
> > participation within
> > those structures won't work. I don't agree. I
> think
> > it will work. Moreover
> > what I am saying is that *unless* people
> participate
> > in those structures,
> > there won't be change along the lines you
> suggested.
> > 
> > If you have other suggestions that could
> practically
> > work please throw them
> > in. 
> > 
> > The problem with your suggestion of writing
> letters
> > to the chairman is that
> > the chairman will then ask: "So how do we fix
> this?"
> > and we end up in the
> > exact same place that we are now.
> > 
> > Now if you could present a clear case as to why
> such
> > a change would be in
> > ICANN's overall interests AND provide a number of
> > suggested routes for
> > getting there, then I think you'd find he would
> > start looking at it
> > seriously. If that whole case was to come from
> > within the ICANN structure,
> > it would add further weight.
> > 
> > But to send a letter saying "this isn't right" and
> > offering no solution is
> > not going to achieve much.
> > 
> > Just my two cents.
> > 
> > I should also say that if people do participate in
> > ICANN's processes they
> > not only benefit from engagement with others but
> > also gain the advantages
> > that come with participation, one of which is that
> I
> > would consider it my
> > duty to make sure that that participation was
> given
> > the appropriate
> > consideration.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Kieren
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> 
>
____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the
> list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> 



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance