Re: [wg-review] [BoD] Yesterday's news.

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

> >From the above article;
> ""I don't believe that (the board) is legitimate until it consists at
> least half of people who came from the Internet community," ICANN
> Director Karl Auerbach told Newsbytes today."

I don't think I used those words - reporters quite frequently get quotes
wrong.  But it is true that it is my feeling that the debate over the
number of at-large directors seats shouldn't be over some number less than
9 (i.e. half or less) of the total number of seats but, instead, should be
on whether the at-large should fill *all* of the board seats.  The reason
for that is that the at-large permits participation for all those people
who operate today via the SO's.  To my mind a "primary" policymaking
organ, such as a supporting organization, already has a pretty major role
to play and ought not to also be picking people who will be deciding
whether to accept that policy.  Instead, my feeling, is that it is a
better structure to have those who will have to endure and pay for the
policy, i.e. the Internet community (everyone who is affected by the net)
to select the people who will decide whether to accept that policy.

		--karl--


--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html