[ga] GA/DNSO Funding Issues

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

I'm afraid my participation levels are down at the moment and may get
worse due to actually having a real life as opposed to how some people
may see my activities :).  However, I have been giving the subject of
funding some thought.

Funding for the GA and DNSO or any of the ICANN bodies is not a simple
matter.  I see a lot of discussion on how it is pay to play and about
the inequality of the system.  I suggest a complete turn around with
our thinking.  Instead of discussing ICANN or external sources funding
attendance at F2F meetings and so forth, we should look at ways to
minimise financial commitment by participants and limiting some of the
advantages those with good financial backing may have.

It is commonly understood that those with financial advantages are
able to participate at the F2F meetings and exert more influence by
having a large presence at all such meetings.  They are also able to
engage in more direct communications with the ICANN Board by way of
having more direct contact.

Perhaps instead of attempting to level the field at their level which
involves higher expenditure we should be looking for the lowest common
demonitor and have the playing field at a level that encourages the
most participation.

I would suggest that the F2F meetings be extrememly limited and that
more economical means of communication be employed.  I futher suggest
that there be strict guidelines on how the ICANN Board is approached.
I would like to see hallway negotiations abolished.  No more of the
back room meetings.

If all communication was conducted and only accepted at a level
available to all, the issue of funding and equality is dealt with.

My proposal is that all ICANN communications/meetings be conducted
online and in the mailing lists.  All hard copy documentation
including internal correspondance be made public on the website and we
have a fully open system.  (note: some sensitive correspondance may be
excluded)

One of the reasons for this suggestion is that even if we evolve both
internal and external funding, there will always be inequality between
those who have good finances and those who don't.  We can never hope
to match the expenditure some large companies may be willing to put
into the ICANN process.  We can not enforce equality as the system
currently stands.  We need to place limits so that those with
financial advantages only have the same access as those with limited
funds.  The common ground for the majority is access to the Internet.
Let us make that our base line.  Not the higher level of needing to
attend F2F meetings and invest large sums into a process we are all
contributing to as volunteers.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html