Re: [ga] DNSO/BC's suicide

["L Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

This is truly interesting.  The BC is now not interested in business that 
simply have a presence on the Internet, leaving out the majority of 
businesses in the world.  So those businesses that may specialize in 
services, professionals (attorneys, doctors, etc), consultants, portals, 
communities offering notice of services, restaurants who post their 
menues, hotels that post information, Software companies that do not 
sell directly on-line, distributors, B2B companies, manufacturers, 
customer support companies, construction companies, and a myriad of 
others will no longer qualify as members of the BC.  There must be 
millions of businesses that do not do business directly with customers 
online, but have a presence on the Net to advertise themselves, or use 
the net for things other than the WWW - extranets, mail exchangers...

How far is this going to go?  Good work, Names Council and BC.  Keep 
degrading ICANN's legitimacy as a bottom up organization that includes 
the Internet community.

On 19 Nov 2001, at 17:26, Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> Dear Fellow GA,
> bluntly, out of nowhere we have received today a proposition from Philip
> Shepard for a new DNSO/BC Charter. This Charter must be commented before
> the end of the month, presented for affirmation [whatever it may means] in
> December and become effective immediately [without any requested approval
> by the BoD].
> 
> What is interesting is that most of the DNSO/BC members are fired.
> 
> This results from the Membership criteria. 2 main criteria: to adore ICP-3
> and to be a real e-commerce: ie mainly primarily carrying commerce on the
> Internet with customers.
> 
> <quote>
> 
> 2 In keeping with the selective membership criteria of other DNSO 
> constituencies, the Business Constituency represents the interests of a
> specific sector of Internet users. The purpose of the Constituency is to
> represent the interests of businesses using the Internet for electronic
> commerce with customers. To avoid conflicts of interest membership is
> typically limited to those entities (or their representatives) whose
> primary use of the Internet is to conduct their business as users of
> electronic commerce in their dealings with customers or suppliers.
> 
> This excludes for-profit entities whose business means they are likely to
> formulate views from the perspective of Internet or Domain Name service
> providers, as well as from other groups whose interests may not be aligned
> with business users.  Such entities may find other constituencies offer
> more appropriate means of representing their members' interests.
> 
> </quote>
> 
> Interestingly enough Marilyn's customers may probably be a Member, but not
> her anymore since she extensively documented that her business was to sell
> e-commerce solutions not to run tham and that Grant was not at all carrying
> anything in the e-business area. As fas I know Bruce James is selling
> computers on-line as his primary activity. Welcome on the NC, Bruce!
> 
> Telcos are obviously out of the picture, so Philips, CNN, Disney etc...  I
> never really understood Philip Shepard's onw business, but I am not sure he
> is selling e-donuts all the day long. Obviously gone is Mike Roberts as he
> does not really sell ICANN T-Shirts on line from his site. Also Kent
> Crispin whose only business is to sell consulting and hosting services to
> the ICANN apart from his other professionnal and yachting duties.
> 
> I could probably stay through an affiliated e-commerce chain we are setting
> up, but I would probably be quickly in contradiction with the European and
> US Internet Security laws the way they develop. This ICP-3 mandatiory
> adoration permits to fire some others. An to deny access to new.net (except
> that New.net carry e-business of non domain names according to ICP-3).
> Great!
> 
> Obviously there not a single word on the budget to carry all that, except
> "sound financial management", no budget, no control, no responsible.
> e-business is really a new econonomy!
> 
> There is not a single word on how the BC is going to pay is debts (roughly
> a TAF - TLD application fee).
> 
> Now, where will the exiled from the BC go?  They "may find other 
> constituencies offer more appropriate means of representing their members'
> interests". There are 55 Members left in the DNSO/BC. As we can hardly
> think that ALCATEL's primary Internet activity is to sell e-burgers, nor
> Alsthom, nor AOL, nor the French Railways or Power companies, nor BT,
> Deutch Telecom, Telephonica, Clear, MCI, Fujitsu, Unilever, etc... will
> their bosses join the NonCom as the ABEM (association of the BC ex-Member)
> 
> Only one interesting issue, RealName - these people are not in the same
> business as New.net so they are a Member - shall have to go.
> 
> Question to the BoD: now that the e-commerce is going to have its own
> constituency, what about creating a serious open and honest Professionnal
> and Industrial User Constituency for the pros?
> 
> Interesting ...
> 
> --
> 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


--
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