Re: [ga] ALAC comments on proposed Bylaws modifications

[Vittorio Bertola <vb@bertola.eu.org>]

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:14:16 -0000, you wrote:

>Thanks for these clarifications, Vittorio
>
>The concern is that in some RALOs, certain organisations may capture the
>RALO and "lock out" the individual vote.
>
>ICANN could have insisted on one member - one vote as the basis of running
>the RALOs, but I suspect ICANN feared that the RALOs would then be
>"captured" by the real members - that is to say, the ordinary individual
>internet users.

This is still something that could be addressed in the MoU between ICANN and
the RALO, to which the Bylaws devolve the practical requirements. As the
ALAC will definitely have a say in this, we might decide to add a "1 head 1
vote" requirement at least where the RALO founding group chooses such
principle. (Ultimately it will be the ICANN Board that approves the MoUs,
but I think that if the ALAC and the RALO agree on a text the Board might be
keen on approving it as it is.)

>This remains a "top down" ICANN Board initaitive, which attempts to capture
>and contain the At Large movement.

I still think that you should judge the mechanism only after it is fully
formed - and that there's plenty of space for influencing it (e.g. see Danny
Younger's initiative).
-- 
vb.               [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<------
--------> http://bertola.eu.org/ - Archivio FAQ e molto altro... <--------
--
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