[ga-nominations] Acceptance of Nomination

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

1a. Full name of the nominee: Patrick Corliss

1b. E-mail address of the nominee: patrick@quad.net.au

1c. Background information about the nominee:

I was born in the UK and emigrated to Australia in 1974.  I am on the Board of
the Australian Domain Administration, auDA.  I manage a private company
specialising in internet strategy.

One issue of interest has been the potential for a DNS directory system.  I have
been working on this problem for a year now.  I have graduate and post-graduate
tertiary qualifications in accounting, computer science and education.  I am
also a former university lecturer.  With my qualifications and experience, I am,
or have been, a member of five professional bodies in the disciplines of
accounting, auditing, computing, management and risk management.

1d. Statement of the nominee's objectives in the role as Chair of the GA:

I see a significant problem in co-ordinating the views of the various
constituencies into a shared voice.  I see this as an important function of the
Chair.  Hence the arguments for a single constituency.  On balance I don't
favour that approach as there is too much common ground within each group.  A
good example is the shared views within a cohesive group like the ccTLDs or the
ISPs.

My feeling is that you must have a consituency structure.  That's not the
problem at all.  Our real problem, as in politics or other constituency
structure, is balancing the various constituencies.  They could be of roughly
equal weight or according to some other criteria such as representativeness.

That's a hard thing to assess when it comes to internet usage !!

The second problem is to make sure that the actual categorisation is fair.  At
present, for example, there is unfairness in not having constituencies for
individuals or small businesses etc.  So they are not properly represented.  It
is also important to allow sufficient flexibility to re-organise the
constituency should it prove to necessary.

And, of course, the third problem is the cross-constituency membership.

In summary, I do not agree that we should necessarily eliminate the Names
Council constituency structure, rolling it into the General Assembly, but I do
believe the ideal constituency structure is an entirely "virtual" structure with
every member being flagged as to their constituency.  This would allow us to
re-formulate the constituencies, quickly if needed.

Regards
Patrick Corliss