Re: [wg-c] Choosing the intial testbed

[James Love <love@cptech.org>]

"Mark C. Langston" wrote:
> The noncommercial attendees at the Cairo meeting?  Which noncommercial
> constituency members had enough money and time to travel all the way
> to Cairo for just over a day's worth of open meetings?  

   There were quite a few.  ACM, CPT, CPT, Digital Bridges and Common
Cause were among the US NGOs.  There were others too from Korea and
Latin America.   The Markle Foundation has a fund to support NGO travel
to these meetings.  And, the NC constituency has its own mailing lists
too.   

   I would agree that it is difficult for these groups to participate,
but some do.  CPT has sent people to the last 3 ICANN meetings, with
external support for only the Cairo meeting.  I think the American
Library Association is contributing $1,000 to the NC Constituency dues.

> Let's not
> forget that noncommercial does not equal individual stakeholder.
> They've made that VERY clear.  As far as I can tell, the NCDNHC is
> full of ISOC chapters and university groups, and several
> 'questionable' groups, such as Kent's boat club.  Just because the
> title includes the word "noncommercial" does not exclude the
> participants from having a financial interest in these decisions.
> Indeed, I do believe several of the NCDNHC members would easily
> qualify as members of other constituencies, all of which are
> commercial.


    This is probably true.  But I would not conclude that the NCDNHC
isn't going to do its job.   It did pass a resolution on the new TLDs at
the Cairo meeting, supporting the creation of new TLDs, and asking that
at least half of the new testbed TLDs be NC domains.   And there was
suprising support and agreement on some core issues on the management of
TLDs.  

> > > >    For the voting proposal. ICANN does have a membership system. It is
> > > > in place.  If there was a "ballot" on 3 TLDS, it would give people a
> > > > reason to register as a member. It's open and free right now.  It may
> > > > have flaws, but compared to what?
> > >
> > > Actually, the membership system is NOT in place.  Nobody has received
> > > the mailings that were supposed to follow the initial on-line registration,
> > > becuase ICANN has not mailed them yet.  There is no At-Large membership,
> > > period.  ICANN never followed through.
> >
> >
> >     Well, ICANN has created the mechanism to become a member.  Of
> > course, having a real vote would require more follow through.  Is this
> > doable?  Of course it is.
> >
> 
> It's "doable" but ICANN seems to be unwilling to do it.  They already
> fear the Great Unwashed Masses enough to have completely changed the
> manner in which the public can join the ICANN BoD, and have held up
> completing the registration process until some unannounced future
> date.

   At Cairo, there was no suggestion that would not move forward.  Is
there anything the contrary?  ICANN was pushing hard for a Sept
election.

   Jamie

=======================================================
James Love, Director           | http://www.cptech.org
Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org 
P.O. Box 19367                 | voice: 1.202.387.8030
Washington, DC 20036           | fax:   1.202.234.5176
=======================================================