Re: [ga] IPC on ALAC

[Marc Schneiders <marc@fuchsia.bijt.net>]

On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, at 21:58 [=GMT+0200], Jeanette Hofmann wrote:

> Ok, here is a second reason why the (national) concept of representativeness is more or
> less useless on the Internet. Although ICANN's policies do indeed affect all users, only
> a minority of users will ever care enough to devote substantial time to naming and
> numbering matters. This is true not only for individual users but also for businesses,
> the IP community or non-commercial groups. International, sector-related policies don't
> attract the same amount of attention as domestic policies do. While it is true that
> domain name holders are countable, it would yet be ridiculous to expect  a majority of
> whatever type of domain name holders to vote on ICANN policies.
> There is no really good, well-tried solution for this problem apart from international
> treaty organizations. The only comforting fact is that it concerns _all_ constituencies
> in ICANN, not only individual users. Even though the IPC wants to make us believe
> otherwise.

I do see your point, but where does the possibilty of working/adequate
representation end? Local politics? The European Union? A consumer
organization for cars? A group for the rights of the blind? It is also
a matter of how important people find it, or how much they are
affected. Those that do or are, will take the lead. That is, I would care
to think, inevitable, even in 'real' politics.

And what about the bodies who take care of rivers, lakes and polders in my
country (NL)? They also have an elected board, chosen by all inhabitants
(and with extra votes for those who own land). They take care of a very
limited set of problems/tasks: dry feet, and rivers that are clean as well
as navigable. Surely their task is more a matter of life and death than
domain names and IP-numbers. Still, it hardly means a thing to most
people, esp. those on higher grounds, who don't own a boat and don't dare
to swim in open water.

And those that do vote, how informed are they?

So, on a conceptual level, what is wrong with accepting that only a small
percentage of the voters gets really involved?

And another thing: Does it make sense to let some civil servant from each
country participate in a new ICANN of the type of a treaty organization?
Will all countries have enough resources and interests to participate in
governing this corner of the universe, called DNS? And will these civil
servants be informed enough? And who will _really_ control them?

--
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