RE: [registrars] Diversity & the new Proposed Constituancy bylaws
Title: Message Ken,
I am
for diversity. I wish we had more of it. More participation is
good.
I do
not think, though, that we can mandate or impose it.
I
assume you are not suggesting we provide an incentive of some kind for
registrars from certain geographical regions to
participate.
I
strongly oppose artificial constraints on who can be elected to our constituency
leadership.
I for
one do not want to be forced to vote for a person who I beleive
*does not* represent my
registrar's views when the person who I believe better
represents those views is ineligable
becuase someone else from the same region has already
been elected.
Especially when it is difficult enough to get people to
run for the executive committee at all.
Besides, as you point out below, we already have this
imposition at other levels at ICANN
to
insure that the internet community from around the globe are duly represented,
which, unfortunately,
raised
its head even recently when it was pointed out to me that if one qualified
person
(Michael) was elected, it would be difficult for
another qualified person (Vint) to be elected
to the
ICANN board since they are both from the same region of the
planet.
I do
not believe that many issues effecting our constituency divide us
geographically,
which
I believe is unlike ICANN that has more geographical-based issues (ccTLDs,
etc.)
I
believe issues our membership will be (and are) deciding naturally separate
us
more
along economic lines that geographical lines.
If you
want to artificially constrain our excom, why don't you suggest we have so many
small registrars
and so
many big registrars represented on the excom? This I believe would create more
balanced
representation on excom than having all big registrars
but just from different countries.
That
would not be diverse, now would it?
(Again, I oppose *any* artificial
constraints).
Plus,
I believe we still have this thing called "voting" in which every
registrar has equal opportunity
to
weigh in on issues no matter what their latitude and longitude combination
may be.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Stubbs [mailto:kstubbs@digitel.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:55 AM To: Registrars Cc: Elana Broitman Subject: [registrars] Diversity & the new Proposed Constituancy bylaws Ross's recent observations :
" A review of the Registrar Constituency
mailing list archive paints an equally dismal
picture. The fact is, regardless of the issue and absent extenuating circumstances, voter turnout is very poor. More than three years ago around this time of the year you indicated on this mailing list that you had strong concerns about the level of participation in the constituency. It doesn't appear that the dynamic has substantially changed." are well taken.
It would appear to me that we have an opportunity with this by law
revision to make a positive statement to all constituents
by including in the requirements for composition of the executive
committee as well as including in "guidelines" for task force
participants a
requirement for "global diversity" (as defined in the ICANN
by-laws). I have noted at the various registrar meeting many competent
parties representing registrars from all parts of the globe and believe that
imposition of this Diversity guideline will encourage greater participation
by these qualified parties.
Addition of this requirement & these task force participation
guidelines to the by-laws would result in the establishment of a more
solid foundation for increased future "global participation" by more members of
the constituency..
Over the next few years registrar issues are going to become much more
"global centric" (i.e. privacy just for starts) & it is essential that
we have
globally-balanced direction from our executive
committee.
ICANN has already seen fit to require this with respect
to constituency names council representation,
Don't we think that it is a good time to implement this Diversity policy
within our own constituency ??
best wishes
ken stubbs
|