[EURO-Discuss] transparency on changes of rules

Thomas Roessler roessler at does-not-exist.org
Tue May 8 18:21:46 EDT 2007

On 2007-05-08 13:05:50 +0200, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> I don't know what was the past correspondence, and I assume that
> this is a question that ultimately will end, for a change :<(,
> with the lawyers, but my understanding since the beginning was
> that the relationship between ICANN and EURALO, including the
> modus operandi of EURALO within ALAC, was going to be governed by
> the MoU.

I'm amazed by the role that, supposedly, the lawyers and the rules
are playing here.

On the one hand, there still isn't a clear indication what the
status of the MoU really is -- is it binding, on whom, and so on.
That would have been a set of questions that should have been
resolved before the MoU was formally signed.

On the other hand, some folks are so in love with the idea that
there is a binding MoU that they now start calling lawyers to
interpret the text that they wrote themselves just a month ago.

Frankly, this style of discussion speaks badly of the things that
are to come in the European RALO.  

Can't we have the discussion how to best represent the diverse
perspectives that are present here in ICANN -- instead of talking
about what diversity rules are in the MoU and what aren't?

Can't we talk about how the different perspectives can collaborate
constructively -- instead of having the current style of discussion
which is, quite frankly, divisive to the point that I'm tempted to
write all this off as an exercise in futility?

Thomas Roessler   <roessler at does-not-exist.org>

More information about the EURO-Discuss mailing list