Re: [ALSC-Forum] No Funds for Proper Analysis

[Derek Conant]

In Stockholm I was 6 hours ahead.
In Kona now I'm 6 hours behind.
I will get to this after a few Mai Ties.

Mahalo!

Jeff Williams wrote:

> Derek and all stakeholders,
>
> Derek Conant wrote:
>
> > Who knows what they are talking about here?  There needs to be a process
> > here that funds the development and advancement of the constructive
> > questions and comments being submitted by participants.
>
>   Agreed.  And the answers should also come from those same or other
> participants as they are stakeholders.
>
> >
> >
> > What we have here is a failure to obtain the funding necessary to
> > present any meaningful comprehensive analysis, compiled by experts
> > presenting statistical data and information concerning the subject
> > matter being addressed by the DNSO.
>
>   I agree.  However one has to determine who is and expert.  That
> can be a difficult task if not one that is really not accurately
> determinable in some instances.  As such, an varied approach
> would be a better method.
>
> >
> > This is primarily why I expressed the necessity of ICANN Approved
> > Proposal Organizations (APOs) at:
> > http://dnsga.org/announcements/atlarge_5june01.html.
>
>   Who and under what criterion are these "APO's" determined?  And
> how are the principals decided that will govern this?
>
> >
> >
> > APOs can be profit and non-profit organizations that qualify to
> > represent their studies, constituencies and/or members.   ICANN will
> > need to evolve toward a structural model and system that gives
> > organizations the incentive to fund comprehensive analysis, compiled by
> > experts presenting statistical data and information concerning the
> > subject matter being addressed by ICANN Supporting Organizations.
>
>   Agreed here as well.  However (See above comments/questions)...
>
> >
> >
> > The APO competition component is clearly apparent in the DNSO process
> > and forums.  This is clearly evident by the existence of established
> > groupies in the DNSO process and forums and their refusal to acknowledge
> > and investigate constructive comments and positions from one not in
> > their group.
>
>   Groupies?  How and under what criterion to you delineate the
> difference
> between "Groupies" and "Experts"?
>
> >  It is also apparent that said groupies feel threatened
> > when constructive comments and positions are presented.
>
>   As do other experts if they are opposed to any findings another group
> of experts that are not one of you proposed "APO's"...
>
> >  Groupies exist
> > in the DNSO process and forums and they appear to be preventing the
> > development and advancement of constructive dialog if the comment and
> > position contribution does not agree with, or does not come from one in
> > the established group.
>
>   Again as do "Experts" in contrast to other "Expert" groups or
> individuals....
>
> >
> >
> > If ICANN is going to allow the formation of groupies in its processes,
> > then these groupies that believe that they know what they are talking
> > about should step up to the plate with money to fund comprehensive
> > analysis, compiled by experts presenting statistical data and
> > information concerning the subject matter being addressed, that proves
> > the groupies position.
>
>   As should the ICANN BoD.
>
> >
> >
> > The ICANN Supporting Organizations and ICANN Board should be relying on
> > experts presenting statistical data and information concerning the
> > subject matter being addressed.  ICANN should not be developing its
> > policy and standards upon a process that is not funded and relies on
> > non-experts.
>
> Again one persons "Expert" is another's "Groupie" to use your
> terminology
> here...
>
> >
> >
> > ICANN and the Internet is mature enough now to begin the process of
> > restructuring its Supporting Organizations and to engage the APO
> > concept.
>
>   Possibly.  However your idea of this concept is not well developed
> given the comments I see here and you URL posted in this post.
>
> >  The APO concept would invite organizations from around the
> > world to fund ICANN internationalization and the development and
> > advancement of international policy and standards.
>
>   The ICANN BoD has been trying to do this.  However they have had
> some difficulty in gaining the creditability to achieve this goal thus
> far.
>
> >  The Governments of
> > the world would also have incentive to fund ICANN internationalization
> > through APO processes.
>
>   Yes they might.  However again, it is necessary to insure that this
> "APO" process is well developed and understood.  Currently your
> idea of the "APO" seems to be a bit short on the well developed side.
> Therefore the understanding will lag as a result...
>
> >
> >
> > I am submitting this for constructive criticism.
>
>   Thank you.  And you have ours...
>
> >
> >
> > Derek Conant
> > DNSGA President and Chairman
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208