Re: [ALSC-Forum] Re: Bottom up process and group dynamics

[Jefsey Morfin]

Dear Dany,
methink that you just shown that the ICANN is a cover-up for ISOC and that 
the @large's problem is only a problem of "competition" with the ISOC :-). 
ISOC people are embarassed in having the USG asking them to support two 
@large structures while one is complex enough to develop and control.

Better to enter the ISOC and to change things from the inside of the real 
thing than trying to change things from inside the fake one. Oh! yes the 
ISOC is "Jon Postel style" ... well time as come to open the windows.... 
and to get real.
jfc



On 02:39 26/04/02, DannyYounger@cs.com said:

>Bruce,
>
>You have remarked that "If we can draw in sufficient numbers world-wide,
>ICANN will have no choice but to recognize us, or face public disdain."
>
>Perhaps you haven't heard of another well-established world-wide organization
>whose members have a passionate interest in the Internet, who aren't
>represented as a constituent group within any of ICANN's current Supporting
>Organizations, who last year opened up new chapters in Ecuador, Bangladesh,
>Luxembourg, Poland, Georgia, and the Republic of Tatarstan, who have 1493
>members in 24 chapters in the developing world, another 42 chapters in
>developed countries and still another 87 chapters-in-formation with an
>overall contributing membership in excess of 7230 members.
>
>That organization is ISOC (the Internet Society), that twice participated in
>early efforts to manage the resource that ICANN now controls.  You may
>recognize some of the names of those prominent in the organization:  ISOC
>Founding Chairman Vint Cerf, ISOC-Benin Chapter president Pierre Dandjinou,
>ISOC-France Chairman Olivier Iteanu, ISOC-Mexico Board member Oscar Robles,
>ISOC-Mexico Chairman Alejandro Pisanty, ISOC Standards Officer Helmut Schink,
>ISOC-Japan Vice Chairman Jan Murai, and ISOC Founding Trustee Lyman Chapin,
>among others.
>
>Still, to this day ISOC is not "recognized" (as you have phrased it), and
>ICANN has suffered no public disdain by not "recognizing" that entity even
>though the full leadership of the ICANN Board stems from that organization.
>What makes you think that ICANN is going to feel any embarrassment or shame
>by not according your tiny nascent organization any recognition?
>
>The At-large is much bigger than any one group such as icannatlarge.com, and
>it requires a comprehensive plan to fully incorporate it (and its member
>organizations such as ISOC) within the ICANN structure.
>
>Bruce, you have argued that ICANN at the very least, should have respected
>your timeline and waited a few more months... what utter nonsense... they're
>supposed to stop what they're doing and wait for some other organization to
>get its act together?  That you choose not to abide by the same set of
>deadlines that everyone else must adhere to paints your organization as
>nothing more than an unbridaled arrogant rogue.
>
>Frankly, why should anyone on the Board want to deal with this group when in
>the first instance it is incredibly small, financially non-self-sustaining,
>won't adhere to generally accepted timetables, and is composed mostly of
>members that are already represented in the Supporting Organizations?
>
>...Just because you've managed to collect some 800 names on a list -- none of
>whom have actually tendered any dues?  How impressive...  You might want to
>prove your commitment before you expect others to believe that such a
>commitment exists.