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

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Sun, Apr 02, 2000 at 02:17:25PM +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> At 18:09 31/03/00 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:
> >On Sat, Apr 01, 2000 at 01:46:33PM +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> >[...]
> >> 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.
> >
> >You are confusing your "cyberspace association/IDNO" with "individual
> >domain name owners" in general.  Individual domain name owners, as a
> >potential constituency, have not presented a petition to ICANN.  Your
> >organization does not credibly represent individual domain name owners.
> >
> 
> No *other* petition for IDNO representation has been made to ICANN. 

Mere presentation of a petition means nothing, of course.  My dog could
present a petition -- that's the nature of the internet.


> The ICANN Board could have conceded in principle that Individual DN owners
> should be given a representative voice on the Names Council.
> It could have said that our organization was not credible and why it
> thought it was not and what should be done about it.
> 
> Instead it chose to ignore the petition altogether.

There are lots of open questions about this issue...the GA, the At-Large
membership of ICANN, the proposal for an "at-large" constituency, etc.  

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
--
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