[discuss] the Individual Domain Name owner's constituency

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

Dear members of the DNSO GA,

My apologies for any duplications, but I cannot assume that everybody is
already subscribed to the new list.

John Lewis wrote:

>Bill, Joop,
>
>A very good point. However it does raise the question as to whether the
>Non-commercial Constituency is most appropriately named if it is intended to
>represent Non-commercial Organisations, which may effectively have needs
>which are more similar to Commercial Orgamisations that to those of
>individuals.
>
This is a problem for the non-commercial constituency.
Both  have indicated that they will accept only organisations as members,
so that leaves the Individuals unrepresented there.


>I am not clear of the distinction between the "At Large" representation at
>ICANN and the "Individual Domain Name Holders". This approach runs the risk
>of taking two bites of the cherry.
>
There is an important distinction. The "at large" representation is for ALL
INTERNET USERS, that is, including individuals who have no stake in the
DNS, because they do not have Domains.  Fittingly, the 9 directors that
they elect, do not make policy.

Individual Domain Name Holders/Owners, on the other hand, DO have a stake
in the DNS, therefore are entitled to their representation in the DNSO.
Given the fact that 9 seats on the NC are for registry/registrar interests,
I would venture that the inclusion of Individual DN holders is very much
warranted.



--Joop Teernstra LL.M.--  , bootstrap puller of
the Cyberspace Association,
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
http://www.democracy.org.nz/idno/