ICANN Accra Meetings
Web Log of #ICANN
IRC discussions 		#icann

This page was last updated on March 15, at 14:30 GMT.

On this web page, you can find logs from the discussions which took place on the #ICANN IRC channel on irc.dal.net during the course of the ICANN Board Meeting in Accra, Ghana, on March 14, 2002. On the channel, interested individuals discussed the current events taking place at the Accra ICANN meeting, and GA co-chair Alexander Svensson provided Scribe's notes from the meeting.

A log of part of the conversations and scribing during the Public Forum on March 13 is also available. Thanks a lot to Alexander Svensson, who provided unofficial Scribe's notes for that day, too!

This web page will continue to be updated occasionally, as official minutes and materials about the meeting are published by ICANN.

Update: The full preliminary report is now available on ICANN's web site.

Thomas Roessler

The ICANN Board Meeting on Thursday, March 14, 2002


Agenda

The meeting took place from 0900-1500 Accra time (GMT).

For details, see also ICANN's Agenda Page for the Accra Board meeting.

The meeting was also webcast. ICANN's official webcast information is available here.  It has been reported that ICANN plans to make the recordings available as soon as possible after the meeting.

Text of Resolutions

Update: ICANN has posted a preliminary report, which contains the correct text of resolutions passed.  Links to the official versions of the various resolutions have been added to the list of resolution titles below, and to the list of vote results..

The draft resolutions below were made available by Karl Auerbach early in the board meeting. They may reflect a drafting status different from the one used as the basis of the participants' discussion, and are only presrved here for historic completenes. Please refer to the official text of the resolutions as made available on the ICANN web site for the wording.

Resolutions passed: Vote Results

The links with the resolutions' titles point to ICANN's preliminary report.

The Chat Log

Time stamps are one hour ahead of Accra local time (GMT).

Time stamp: Wed Mar 13 19:43:07 2002

<tlr>

A short explanation of the time stamps in the web log may be in order: Time stamps are added upon users joining the channel, or public messages. There are always _at_ _least_ ten minutes between two time stamp entries.

<tlr>

Also, whenever a time stamp is logged, the following notice is sent to the channel, but not logged to the web page:

<tlr>

"Notice: Everything that's said on this channel is logged to http://does-not-exist.org/icann-log.html"

<tlr>

I hope that the web version of the log turns out to be helpful.

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 04:50:06 2002

<adam[]>

icann sucks.

<adam[]>

iana stinks,

<adam[]>

w00t.

<adam[]>

bleh.

<adam[]>

I wish there were some ICANN experts in here that I could talk to.

<adam[]>

But alas, there are none

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 07:42:22 2002
Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 08:16:30 2002
Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 08:33:38 2002
Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 09:06:58 2002

<joop>

Hi Thomas, thanks for the notice.

<joop>

Was that the same yesterday?

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 09:23:44 2002
Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 09:35:11 2002

<GaryOsbourne>

not here, just logging

<joop>

Hi karl, did you get the sql file already?

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 09:45:20 2002

<tlr>

Good morning. Was the schedule for the meeting changed, or is this just preparatory chatter?

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 09:55:49 2002

<tlr>

Karl: could you possibly provide some scribing? All I get is a video feed.

<karl-a>

I can't scribe, I'm on the phone to Ghana. I don't know if any of you are getting this.

<karl-a>

Who of you have seen the proposed resolutions?

<tlr>

The real-time scribe notes (which are almost unreadable) look like a proposed resolution on the At Large is passing through. I have not seen the text of that resolution.

<karl-a>

It effectiely eliminates the at-large.

<tlr>

It does not seem to be available on the web site, yet.

<karl-a>

It appears to not be posted.

<tlr>

The real-video feed is also gone.

<karl-a>

I put the resolutions up at: http://www.cavebear.com/tmp/resolutions1.pdf

<karl-a>

and http://www.cavebear.com/tmp/resolutions2.pdf

<tlr>

Thanks, will mirror at http://does-not-exist.org/accra-resolutions/

<asvensson>

Vint Cerf: [re-reads last paragraph of proposed resolution]

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 10:05:50 2002

<asvensson>

Jonathan Cohen: Like to make a point. Sensitive matter to a lot of the community. This motion had the most discussion and debate. Very difficult decision.

<asvensson>

Jonathan Cohen: Many people on the Board like the principle, of elections. Some do not

<asvensson>

Jonathan Cohen: Read motion very carefully. Does not foreclose issue for all time

<asvensson>

Jonathan Cohen: Subsequent Boards free to reconsider any aspect.

<karl-a>

Apparently the version I posted isn't the same they are talking about.

<asvensson>

Amadeu: First of all, I have never been convinced that online elctions are best mechanism to a) adress Internet user participation and b) as a mechanism for populating the Board.

<asvensson>

Amadeu Abril i Abril: Firmly convinced that user participation is very important.

<asvensson>

Amadeu Abril i Abril: Critical to encourage community to build representative, strong and workable participation structures for ICANN.

<asvensson>

Amadeu Abril i Abril: I'm not saying only I don't want online elections. I want a real membership structure.

<asvensson>

Amadeu Abril i Abril: I want strong voice, and I want these voices being organized.

<asvensson>

Amadeu Abril i Abril: Uncomfortable about the way this Board has dealt with At Large issues.

<asvensson>

Amadeu Abril i Abril: Have received lots and lots of efforts. Have been delaying things too much. Fed up with short-term political concerns.

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Version Louis sent out last night is not the one which is discussed.

<asvensson>

Vint Cerf: All other Board members similarly impaired.

<asvensson>

Last paragraph: Resolved that the Board Committe on ICANN Evolution and Reform, working in conjunction

<asvensson>

with the President and staff, is instructed to ensure that their ongoing efforts

<asvensson>

at crafting a blueprint for ICANN reform include (a) workable mechanisms and procedures

<asvensson>

than enable meaningful opportunities for participation by the full range of Internet

<asvensson>

users, including individuals, academic institutions, large and small businesses, non-commercial

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 10:15:54 2002

<asvensson>

entitites (including consumer groups), and other non-governmnetal organizations,

<asvensson>

(b) an appropriate role for those interests in ICANN's

<asvensson>

coordinating and management structures

<asvensson>

and (c) appropriate mechanisms to minimize disruption

<asvensson>

during the reform implementation process

<asvensson>

---- THIS WAS THE LAST PARAGRAPH ----

<asvensson>

Vint Cerf: Last paragraph changed. Resolved that Board Committee on ICANN Restructuring...

<BenEdelman>

Sorry to interrupt scribing -- hope we all have big screens so this isn't too intrusive -- but am I the only one with solid static in place of streaming audio from the webcast? Tried two different otherwise-healthy computers, etc.

<joop>

Ben, its the same for all of us

<tlr>

Ben: You're not the only one. Alexander's scribing is, right now, the only available source of what is being said in Accra.

<BenEdelman>

Incredible. Were I at work rather than at home, I'd try to webcast audio through a conference call split feed off of Karl's teleconference (if he were willing), but that's infeasible given my need to sleep. (And Karl -- or ICANN staff! -- might not appreciate it.)

<alexandersvensson>

Andy Müller-Maguhn: What we do here is to give a job of possible At Large election to Board committee

<alexandersvensson>

Andy Müller-Maguhn: Would like subcommittee (of Restructuring Committee) of organization of At Large election

<alexandersvensson>

Rob Blokzijl: Then I want seven other subcommittees.

<alexandersvensson>

Andy Müller-Maguhn: [repeat] Want to add to last paragraph: That the Board Restructuring COmmittee creates a new subcommittee for At Large organization

<karl-a>

If possible could someone enter the text of the amendment into this IRC?

<alexandersvensson>

Nobody seconds

<joop>

i think karl wants the organization to take place outside icann

<karl-a>

On the screen in Accra.

<joop>

that's why he doesn't second

<karl-a>

I'm being told that no amendment has actually been moved yet. If a second is needed could someone note it here?

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 10:27:35 2002

<alexandersvensson>

Andy Müller-Maguhn: Another proposal, but if you don't want that, you don't want that either.

<alexandersvensson>

Andy Müller-Maguhn: A mechanism for election or selection of At Large directores who will represent the At Large membership on the Board

<alexandersvensson>

Andy Müller-Maguhn: A mechanism for election or selection of At Large directors to succeed the current At Large directors

<alexandersvensson>

who will represent the AT Large membership on the Board

<alexandersvensson>

[Not yet seconded]

<alexandersvensson>

[Yes, but Sang-Hyon just seconded to ask a question]

<alexandersvensson>

Sang-Hyon Kyong: Q to Andy. Assume that timing of Committe's action on this particular point related to the time frame aftrer the expiration of the terms of the current members?

<karl-a>

Could someone in accra let them know that the phone link to Linda W. and myself has gone down

<karl-a>

and that they are trying to reconnect.

<alexandersvensson>

Andy MM: Currently, nine people's terms expire end of November

<alexandersvensson>

Andy MM: Until that point, this should take place.

<alexandersvensson>

Amadeu Abril i Abril: Serious problem with proposition and general view of At Large membership.

<alexandersvensson>

Amadeu Abril i Abril: Point which I agree with Stuart Lynn is need to overcome perceived dangers.

<alexandersvensson>

Amadeu Abril i Abril: Problem with representative model is each Board m3embers is here to represent a special interest.

<alexandersvensson>

Rob Blokzijl: Should not create special positions for special interest groups.

<alexandersvensson>

Jonathan Cohen: This is a matter that's been canvassed pretty thoroughly on this Board

<alexandersvensson>

[Told Louis]

<alexandersvensson>

Jonathan Cohen: Would be wrong to hamstring such a committee

<alexandersvensson>

Andy MM: Want to point out two things.

<alexandersvensson>

Andy MM: We should watch the impact of what ICANN does

<alexandersvensson>

Andy MM: We would need a half sentence additional here to extend the terms of the directors.

<alexandersvensson>

Andy MM: Know that this requires changed to Bylaws

<alexandersvensson>

Vint Cerf: Might simply call attention to the need to take action about those directors in a timely way.

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: If we do not have At Large Board members at the time when an At Large is discussed, we're going to have the same problem we've had all along

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Those interested in creation of public participation aren't parties to the discussion.

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Create some means for ensuring there is meaningful participation

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: All directors understand the need to do the right thing.

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Reality is: Everything needs bylaws change, which has to be drafted very carefully.

<alexandersvensson>

Vint Cerf: Vote on amendment

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 10:37:51 2002

<alexandersvensson>

[Amendment on last paragraph: "(d) a mechanism for election or selection of

<alexandersvensson>

At Large directors to succeed the current At Large directors

<alexandersvensson>

to succeed..." [etc.]

<alexandersvensson>

[Majority against amendment]

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: Sounds to me like amendment require reform committe to come up a reform that makes a provision for some kind of atlarge membership on the board

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: Positive

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Yes

<alexandersvensson>

Vint Cerf: 5 yes, 12 against

<alexandersvensson>

Vint Cerf: Now back to full resolution

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Yesterday at Public Forum, there was some intervention, asking view particularly from At Large directors.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Very difficult question for all of us.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Proud of being At Large member.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Thanks to election, great emotional tie to community, especially in the AsiaPac region.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Met during that time almost all other candidates. With many of them, I'm now working together for the common goal of stability of the Internet.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Election very important start point

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: To be very honest, I don't think -- for the selection of Board of Directors -- elections is the best way at this point.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Can select good group of people by some other means.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: All director colleagues are wokring for the general issues of the Internet; we are all At Large directors.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: When I was running, I had five promises at www.mkatoh.net

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: 1. stabilizing ICANN.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: I'm from a country where English is not the first language.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Suggested to creat a local ICANN supporting organization of communities.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: If I read correctly ASLC paper, something similar suggested.

<dpf>

Evening

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: My fourth point was about the election. I already menetion importance of reviewing and adjusting election mechanism

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Lastly, I emphasized IDN issues.

<joop>

evening david, this is our only lifeline to what's said

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Have to get confident on ICANN activities by making ICANN a more stable organizations.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: When we talk about At Large, we have to think about the At LArge as a group.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: Have to be careful to hear from people who are not in this room.

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: SHould revisit election issue in several years.

<dpf>

Yes one could get paranoid that they refuse to pay for remote participation at the very same meeting proposals to get rid of at large is pushed

<alexandersvensson>

Masanobu Katoh: At this point, I don't think election is the way forward.

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Much has been said.

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Unfortunate that so much of the rhetoric surrounding what goes on in ICANN tends to get cast in "Win/Lose".

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 10:47:56 2002

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Have to work more towards a dialogue where we all work together to win.

<dpf>

Who is Katoh?

<tlr>

Japanese at-large director, elected.

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Hard for people who have worked passionately and very hard for many years towrds something they very deeply and sincerely believe in.

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Resolution as a starting point

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: ICANN had not too much participation, but too little.

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Litmus test of participation is not whether 20, 50, 5000 or 100000 people vote,

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: but it's in terms of the diversity of dialogue, input, communication, ideas.

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Don't think online elections are wise at this point -- no statement for eternity.

<joop>

And who is the judge of the quality of the dialogue?

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: My fear is that even as conceived, we will have organizations that don't reflect the richness and divserity

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: of viewpoints that are around in the world.

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Am opposed to elections right now.

<joop>

Then what will be the role of the at large?

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Committed to r4each out and work with those of you who are interest in building the right kind of partoicipation and involvement.

<alexandersvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Not with polarizing rhetoric

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: This is hardly Win/Win, this is Win/Major Lose.

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: What do our constituencies win? Nothing.

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Resolution says ICANN is not a democratice public institution, but a paternalistic oligarchy.

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Not failure of technology or procedure, it's a failure of will.

<joop>

Well, at least that's honest :-)

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: What have management done for planning elections.

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: All we heard that we have the Grand Reorganization Plan which removes public even further from ICANN

<alexandersvensson>

Karl Auerbach: My prediction then that there will not be an ICANN in 18 to 24 months.

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: Could not quite hear.

<joop>

Three years of work down the drain

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: Much has been said by Katoh-san and Stuart.

<dpf>

Oh dear just read archive and 12-5 vote. Looks to be all over for at large.

<karl-a>

Don't forget that I said that this resolution transforms ICANN into an a paternalistic oligarchy, a return to imperialism, a resurrection of the concept of "the white mans burden".

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: As I read this resolution, take serious parts of it that indicate that Board wishes to move forward with informed participation of the full range.

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: Problem whether we are on the same page on ICANN's mission.

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: Mission must be accepted and a process for modifying the mission. Cannot run organization without mission change as the world changes.

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: Trying to create an organization out of whole cloth.

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: In favour of this resolution.

<alexandersvensson>

Linda Wilson: Come to it from four years of working as an initial At Large member.

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 10:58:28 2002

<tlr>

ah, there's audio feed.

<asvensson>

Ivan Moura Campos: Different views and boundaries of mission depending on people you talk to

<asvensson>

Ivan Moura Campos: We should clean this up once and for all

<asvensson>

Ivan Moura Campos: Some consistency in the words of people who believe that it should be very, very, very strictly technical.

<asvensson>

Ivan Moura Campos: Inserting a new domain takes 12 seconds, but the consequences are enormouse. Boundaries are not easy.

<asvensson>

Ivan Moura Campos: For some people whose energy, good will, they should do it in some other organization.

<asvensson>

Ivan Moura Campos: ICANN is a technical organization. As such, it is arguable whether ot not it should have elections.

<asvensson>

Nii Quaynor: Sensitivity to coupling with broader reform.

<asvensson>

Nii Quaynor: Prefer that At Large does not appear to be subsumed by the new proposal for the reform.

<asvensson>

Sang-Hyon Kyong: As resolution stands, it creates one uncertainty.

<asvensson>

Sang-Hyon Kyong: Up until this time, there was the possibility of having an election this year to select/elect At Large directors whose terms are expiring this fall.

<asvensson>

Sang-Hyon Kyong: The wording of this particular resolution -- I refer to the last whereas clause.

<asvensson>

Sang-Hyon Kyong: This possibility of having an election this year is virtually eliminated.

<asvensson>

Sang-Hyon Kyong: Uncertainity the elimination creates is what will happen to those seats that are presently held by the At Large directors.

<asvensson>

Sang-Hyon Kyong: In event that reform does not take place at the time of the expiration of the rems of there people

<asvensson>

Sang-Hyon Kyong: Serious concern. Board well advised to make that uncertainty taken off and clarified.

<joop>

That's right. Time to call a spade a spade.

<asvensson>

Sang-Hyon Kyong: Amendment: "Resolved that ... in the event the reform being under discussion presently which may call for restructuring of the board does not take place before the expiration of the At Large directors presently serving, then Board is committed to do what it can, what it should to extend the terms of those Board members until

<asvensson>

such reform is finalized or implemented"

<asvensson>

[Andy seconds]

<tlr>

That's non-binding language. :-/

<karl-a>

One of the things that is not being discussed is the fact that the 4-ever-continuing board members call themselves "at-large" directors.

<asvensson>

Hans Kraaijenbrink: Q to Sang-Hyon Kyong: Where in present resolution are concerns not covered?

<asvensson>

Hans Kraaijenbrink: Reads that Board avoids disruption in the governance of the corporation.

<joop>

karl are you still on the phone?

<karl-a>

Yes, I'll be on the ;phone for the entire meeting.

<asvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Don't know that there are proposals on the table that call for restructuring the Board as

<asvensson>

Hans Kraaijenbrink: opposed to the reforming of ICANN.

<asvensson>

[Oops, that was Stuart, not Hans]

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 11:08:37 2002

<asvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Due notice!

<tlr>

Errm, wait a moment - we won't have elections because there was no due notice of proposed bylaw changes? how very nice.

<asvensson>

Ivan Moura Campos: Minutes make clear that we will not have this happen.

<asvensson>

Ivan Moura Campos: For sake of clarification, why not.

<asvensson>

Vint Cerf: [reads]

<asvensson>

[See Sang-Hyon Kyong text]

<asvensson>

Jonathan Cohen: Briefly say that completely agree with Ivan, but highest unlikelyhood that we will let this happen. I strongly oppose the amendment; it's just unnecessary; should not hamstring this way.

<tlr>

Cerf: Bylaw change can be implemented in time in Bucharest.

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Support amendment in concept.

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach: But rather vague.

<asvensson>

Vint Cerf: Call for vote

<asvensson>

Vint Cerf: on amendment

<asvensson>

[Andy yes, Sang-Hyon yes]

<asvensson>

[Linda no, Karl yes]

<asvensson>

[All others no]

<asvensson>

[one abstention]

<joop>

who?

<asvensson>

Vint Cerf: Back to primary discussion of entire resolution.

<karl-a>

My point was that given ICANN's snail like processes, it is unlikely that any reorganizion would be made by the end of the year.

<tlr>

Ivan absatained.

<asvensson>

Alejandro Pisanty: Coming back to what Ivan said about elections where democracy has been developing.

<asvensson>

Alejandro Pisanty: E.g. one of the ways the PRI has seemed to win elections by bringing electors to very rural regions.

<asvensson>

Alejandro Pisanty: Whoever can increase the electorate, wins the election.

<tlr>

This is, quite frankly, outrageous.

<asvensson>

Alejandro Pisanty: Am uncomfortable not to know who is speaking.

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 11:18:42 2002

<asvensson>

Alejandro Pisanty: Strongly catalyzed movement which is weeding out people who don't seem to have a real stake in making things work

<asvensson>

Alejandro Pisanty: Support Rob Blokzijls comment to define our mission. Finalized in terms of this mission what is at stake for the different groups

<joop>

is that what Pisanti advocates?

<asvensson>

Alejandro Pisanty: As soon as real domain deletion policy was addressed yesterday, the room was one third empty.

<vbertola>

hi guys - thanks to thomas for letting the ALSC list know about this channel :-)

<asvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Alejandros comment illustrate the point I'm going to lead to.

<asvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Karl -- you passionately believe that the way of bringing At Large issues to the table are online elections.

<asvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Litmus test is not whether you are a member of the Board, you surely agree.

<asvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Absolutely untrue that there is no contingeny planning for At Large elections.

<asvensson>

Stuart Lynn: Also due to the very hard work of Denise Michel, elections could certainly happen.

<asvensson>

Rob Blokzijl: Remind the Board -- plane to catch at 10.20 pm on Saturday.

<asvensson>

Rob Blokzijl: Want to spend reasonable time on the real issues. Dancing around with deck chairs in our arms.

<asvensson>

Rob Blokzijl: Completely lost what we are doing right now. No new arguments.

<asvensson>

Rob Blokzijl: I call for a vote.

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Should discuss this as long as we have to.

<joop>

The vote does no more than reflect how this Board is constituted.

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Regarding Ivan's comment on technical comments. We are doing policy.

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Picking the color of the carpeting in the passenger cabin, not picking pilots.

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Yes, we want qualified voters. US history: After freeing slaves, massive restricitions imposed on them.

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Lead to manipulation of vote.

<asvensson>

Karl Auerbach: Entering a very difficult area.

<asvensson>

Vint Cerf: Hard to find the right tool.

<asvensson>

[vote on whole resolution]

<asvensson>

14 in favour, Karl against, Andy and Sang-Hyon abstain

<asvensson>

-- break --

<asvensson>

-- will be back afterwards --

<tlr>

Karl: Is this the text you forwarded, or is it different? If the latter, what are the differences?

Time stamp: Thu Mar 14 11:30:18 2002

<karl-a>

The resolutions that I posted are correct except that there is a missing paragraph on the one that just passed. That paragraph says something about the reconfiguraiton panel doing stuff.

<karl-a>

It's really hard talking into a half duplex telephone! ;-)

<vbertola>

karl, do you think that the situation could change if we actually had a working At Large organization in place? It is what I asked to Vint yesterday,

<vbertola>

and he answered "yes, maybe elections could happen once you demonstrate you have a working organization". It is possibly just an excuse,

<tlr>

Just to make sure I'm getting this right - what we are talking about right now is the ALC resolution, right?

<vbertola>

but at least it would remove yet another argument to them.

<joop>

Vittorio, what does "working" mean if there is no clear goal?

<vbertola>

I partly agree on the fact that elections are not the only goal of an At Large organization.

<joop>

Why would anyone want to give his time, if it's not going to directly influence policy?

<vbertola>

I guess we are only left with the harder way: first, we demonstrate we can make intelligent contributions to the whole thing, and then we try to get the elections.

<WilliamXW>

the influence comes only from the elections, though

<vbertola>

and, for the first time in my life, I agreed with Pisanty when he

<vbertola>

told that there is more interested in the elections matter than in the actual policy discussions.

<joop>

talked about manipulating elections?

<vbertola>

(I hope I won't agree with him again in my life :-) )

<vbertola>

no, of course 99% of what the board members said, except Karl, was junk

<joop>

Actually, comparing the at large population with the mexican countryside does make a point..

<vbertola>

but anyway, we only have a few choices in front of us:

<vbertola>

1) we are disappointed, f**k off ICANN, everybody go home and have a beer

<tlr>

vbertola: I think that the argument he used was flawed. You'll always have people who specialize on certain issues. In this case, we (rightly so!) have some people specializing on vote issues on the meeting.

<tlr>

What, precisely, is wrong about that?

<vbertola>

well, I know that most of us interested in At Large do so because we are also very interested and passionate about the policy issues.

<vbertola>

but I have the feeling that this is not true for everybody, and we should be careful to keep in our mind that the At Large thing is an instrument to get good policy.

<joop>

correct. But how many have fallen off, burt out or chased off?

<joop>

burnt

<ColPanicX>

killed

<WilliamXW>

I guess that depends on if you see the At-large as providing policy input, I really don't, I see it's role more as electing representatives to the bodies who will do that

<vbertola>

so... to continue... alternatives are

<vbertola>

2) we claim that ICANN is illegitimate and we wait hoping that the US government will send them home