[ga-full] Individual Domain Name Owners

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

Sorry for the formatting, but I had to go to the archives due to an email
"out".

Roberto wrote:


Kent Crispin wrote:
>> >> Of course, only if there is a sufficient number of interested 
>> individuals.
>>One must consider "sufficient number" in comparison with the 16,000
who>have signed up for icann atlarge membership.
[Roberto]
>Let me respectfully disagree.I was talking about "sufficient number" in
the >context of the GA members, not the world's population.The concept I
>wanted to put forward is that if we have, let's say, 100 GA members that
are >speaking as individuals (while the rest is involved in one or more
already >recognized Constituencies), it will not be sufficient to have half
a dozen of >them pushing hard for a Constituency to put the proposal
forward, but we >need larger numbers.

[JT]
Something like, say, 50 ?

[Roberto]
The 16K ICANN members are a completely different animal.I personally have
no idea about how and why they came to the conclusion of being willing to
be ICANN Members, but what I can say is a large majority of them is "a
priori" not specifically interested in DNSO issues, because I have never
seen such a crowd online or offline debate DNSO issues before. And it is
fairly likely that we will *never* see the 16K debate DNSO issues (but this
is just my feeling).Don't misunderstand me, I am tremendously happy that
16K people are showing interest in ICANN, and definitively would love to
see 10, 100, 1000 times more, but I have serious doubts that the reason for
joining is to discuss DNSO matters.

[JT]
On this point I agree with Roberto, but I'm sure it will be disputed, using
every kind of sophistry in the book.
[kentC]
> One must also consider>that from the perspective of representation, the
atlarge membership of
>ICANN controls half the board seats. This is far more 
>power/representation than *any* constituency of the DNSO. There is a 
>real and legitimate concern that the atlarge membership already tilts
>the representation equation far to the side of individuals. 

[Roberto]
>Representation of what? For doing what?All what I know is that these 16K
or hopefully more people will (eventually) elect half of the board.There is
no evidence whatsoever that these 16K people will bring any contribution to
the debate on DNSO issues.And this is the point.What is needed, is the
voice of the laymenm the users, the consumers, the small guys, the
families, the individual domain name owners, and so on, in the debate about
policy making.And this debate is done in the NC. Therefore, this essential
component of the Internet world has to be present.It is obvious to
everybody, I assume, that this representation will be minoritary in the NC,
and therefore largely ininfluent in the decisions of the NC, that will
still be "controlled" by the "big guys", and specifically the duopoly
"technicians" plus "commercials". But the role of the Individuals, like the
NonCom, is very important, because they can bring into the discussion
aspects that have not been considered by the others, and therefore be an
essential element for the completeness of the debate and for making a
decision on policy recommendations that can claim to be taking into account
the balance of all stakeholders.This is absolutely incorrelated with the
"power" of (eventually) electing almost one half of the Board.RegardsRoberto

[JT]
Bravo, Roberto. 
Perhaps more people will listen when it comes from your keyboard.
The Board is not likely to get involved with detailed DNS policy. It's job
is to listen to NC recommendations.

Of course it is to be hoped that at least one of the new directors will
take up the cause of the individuals' constituency in the DNSO, but it
would be wildly optimistic to expect that the grassroots of the Individual
Domain name Owners will be able to support the campaigns of multiple
advocates for their rights and interests on the ICANN Board.
Many of the new Director candidates will be ccTLD operators or
representatives of established organizations.

It is just political realism to expect that the Individual Domain Name
owners (even when slightly organized) will remain underrepresented in the
ICANN structure.
To paint to opposite picture should be exposed for what it really is
:sowing FUD.





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

--
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