[ga-full] RE: [ga] About GA membership again......

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

At 16:29 30/03/00 +0200, Alf Hansen wrote:
Can somebody
>please explain why individuals (not connected to any organization in a DNSO
>constituency) should be represented with voting rights in DNSO GA?
>
>(I may step into a can-of-worms her, but I just want to hear the arguments,
>and perhaps be convinced to change my mind....)
>

The arguments have been presented many times, but here we go again...
Typical Individual Domain Name Owners (and I do not mean ccTLD, IPC or
would-be registrars, who happen to have a domain of their own as well) have
their own "stake" in the DNS, which is their Domain, nothing more, nothing
less.
They are a constituency because of this common interest.
 
They are not represented in the constituencies on the NC, because the
interim ICANN Board so far  has refused to consider their petition to be
recognized as a constituency.
Therefore, their only way to be heard in the DNSO and have some effect on
policy that is going to affect them,  is through their membership of the GA. 
(Of course they will end up frustrated, because the NC can freely ignore
the GA) 

Individuals who do not hold Domain Names, but who still have an interest in
the ICANN governance process, find their place in the ICANN at-large
membership along with everybody else who cares to be there.  
Unless major changes are effected in the bylaws regarding the powers of
this at-large membership to freely elect its representatives to the Board,
this at-large membership looks like being there for decorative purposes only.


--Joop Teernstra LL.M.--  , founder  of
the Cyberspace Association,
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
http://www.idno.org  (or direct:) 
http://www.democracy.org.nz/idno/

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html