ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Joop's motions


At 13:36 13/05/01 -0700, William S. Lovell wrote:



But first, since from Florida we know how voters can get confused, I would
strongly urge that the desired representation for individuals be given the term
"Individuals Constituency = IC."  If this group has too many "fumble fingers"
in it, as I can sometimes be, IDNH and IDNO will get confused, and people
may be yelling "yeah, yeah" for one when they mean the other.

That is right and this is the reason why I have proposed calling it the IC.



But as to the substance, the incorrect premise is that to form an IC one goes
through some list of existing bodies that have advanced themselves as
candidates.

That would indeed be a false premise. However, I do not advocate it.
If the IDNO has to die in order for an IC (with a universally approved structure---tiny problem: how are you going to get that) to take it's place, that is fine with me.



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


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>