Re: DNSO / Individual v. Corporate Voting

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Tue, Nov 24, 1998 at 11:19:38AM -0500, Bret A. Fausett wrote:
> I have read the notes the from the Monterrey meeting as well as the three 
> drafts of the DNSO bylaws, and I have a couple of questions/comments on 
> things that do not appear to have been addressed. For ease of reading and 
> response, I will separate them into different threads.
> 
> INDIVIDUAL V. CORPORATE VOTING.  
> 
> I was pleased to see movement toward an open membership, with individuals 
> included with corporations and associations. As far as voting is 
> concerned, was the problem of individual voting addressed? Particularly, 
> what happens if a large organization enlists each of its employees to 
> participate and vote separately? Does this lead to the "capture" problem 
> that we are trying to avoid? 
> 
> If so, does this mean that we should place some restrictions on an 
> individual's right to vote on policy issues if his or her employer is an 
> interested party? Or can we simply address this concern by having a 
> moderate fee on membership (one that is not onerous for an individual, 
> but would become onerous to a corporation if it paid for numerous 
> memberships)?

It would seem very difficult for a single organization to capture
control of the Names Council.  A number of shadow organizations would
have to be created that met the requirements for several of the
constituencies, and they would have to buy their way into these
several constituencies, as well, by paying any extra fees.  So, to
the extent that policy is decided in the Names Council, capture seems
unlikely. 

There are unknowns in how policy is decided, though.  In particular,
I don't think there is a consensus on the circumstances where there
might be a vote of the entire membership (for example, one model is 
that the NC serves as a nominating committee for a slate of DNSO 
board reps, and the general membership votes on the potential 
candidates, selecting three nominees for the ICANN board.)  It's 
possible that some kind of capture could operate in this arena, but 
it seems unlikely to me.

kent

-- 
Kent Crispin, PAB Chair			"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html