RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>]

  It strikes me that we all need to also be realistic about those for whom
we say we speak.  For instance, to note that there need to be lots of
constituencies, when many of the groups have to date been relatively
uninvolved seems to be missing a larger point: that it is critical to ensure
that there is a process to recognize legitimate groupings when they do
become engaged, if the existing groups/constituencies do not meet/reflect
them.  
 
We won't get everything right; let's strive to get it "good", and ensure an
effective and fair process which lets other groups, when and if they do
organize, emerge.   

-----Original Message-----
From: jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 1999 1:56 PM
To: DNSO.association.org
Cc: discuss@dnso.org; domain-policy@open-rsc.org; ICANN Comments;
etrigar@teleline.es; edyson@edventure.com; mmr@darwin.ptvy.ca.us;
linda_wilson@radcliffe.edu; junsec@wide.ad.jp; gregcrew@iaccess.com.au;
geraldine.capdeboscq@bull.fr; gconrades@polarisventures.com;
fitzsimmon@dnb.com; gconrades@icann.org; gregcrew@icann.org;
roberts@icann.org; DNS Policy
Subject: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in
singapore next month?


Ellen and all, 

  Ellen's arguments here are quite good and indeed valid.  A such, and has 
been pointed out countless times, defining Constituencies as part of 
a structure of any Draft DNSO proposed bylaws is divisive at best, and 
only leads to one group being disenfranchised to some extent.  Hence 
a FLAT membership is the only open, transparent, and accountable 
"General Assembly" or what have you, membership structure that 
will provide for prevention of capture or disproportionate representation. 


Ellen Rony wrote: 


Well, since you asked, my short answer is NO. 

Kilnam Chon wrote: 
> our question/suggestion is "do we want to hold preliminary DNSO
constituency 
> meetings on 1999.3.4?" if we do, then some constituencies would meet in
the 
> morning or afternoon in parallel on 1999.3.4.  For example, 
> 
>         Morning                 Afternoon 
> 
>         ISP & Connectivity      Business 
>         Registry                Registrar 
>         Trademark               Non-commercial 


This idea smacks of hubris -- deja vu all over again for those who watched 
the IAHC/CORE/PAC/PAB debacle. 


ICANN has NOT annointed any DNSO, and the TWO proposals submitted on 
February4 and 5 differ on the issue of constituencies. 


Unless you are wedded to a zero-sum game, the prudent course would be to 
use the Singapore time to discuss the constituency issue among proponents 
of BOTH proposals.  Frankly, I think you have to figure out how you 
identify and validate DNSO membership before you decide how or whether to 
splinter it up into constituencies. 


And by the way, let me say AGAIN that 
*  trademark and business are both commercial constituencies 
*  registry, registrar and ISP/Connectivity are all infrastructure 
constituencies 


The DNSO.ORG proposal groups non-commercial uses of the Internet 
(education, public advocacy, religious, personal, non profit) into ONE 
constituency with 3 
members on the names Council.  5/6 of the representation (15 members of the 
Names Council) are allotted to operators with a commercial agenda (if 
registries and registrars are for profit) 


If there's a separate constituency for trademark owners (which I don't 
think should occur) then there must be a separate constituency for 
education. 


And if registries, registrars and ISPs are each given individual 
constituencies, then non-profit organizations, educational institutions, 
public advocacy groups, the religious sector, and personal users would all, 
likewise, be different constituencies.  And none of this constituency-based 
approach reflects real percentage use use of the Internet. 


My point is that this pie has many ways to slice it, which is where I see 
some intractible differences.  Before you slice the pie, you have to have 
everyone come to the table. 


Ellen Rony                                                     Co-author 
The Domain Name Handbook                   http://www.domainhandbook.com
<http://www.domainhandbook.com>  
================================  // =================================== 
ISBN 0879305150                *="  ____ /             +1 (415) 435-5010 
erony@marin.k12.ca.us             \     )                    Tiburon, CA 
                                   //  \\   "Carpe canine" 


--- 
You are subscribed to dnso.discuss as: jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com 
To unsubscribe, change your list options, or view archives go to: 
http://lists.association.org/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=dnso.discuss
<http://lists.association.org/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=dnso.discuss>  
This list system donated by Lyris Technologies ( http://www.lyris.com/
<http://www.lyris.com/> ).

Regards, 

-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams 
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. 
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. 
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com 
Contact Number:  972-447-1894 
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208