Re: [wg-review] Clarifications requested from BoD, Staff, NC, TC,Chair prior to co-Chair elections

[Robin Miller <robin@minervan.com>]

Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 05:05:31PM +0100, Robin Miller wrote:
> >
> >
> > Kent Crispin wrote:
> >
> > > However, this brings up an important point concerning the basic
> > > structural nature of ICANN/DNSO.  Clearly, the absolutely overwhelming
> > > majority of the 35 million members of the ICC simply don't have time or
> > > interest to devote to participating in ICANN.  To *almost everyone*,
> > > domain names are in fact a microscopic specialized policy concern, and
> > > they would much rather leave it to some organization to represent them.
> >
> > right... the overwhelming majority of Americans do not vote... so therefore
> > voting is a microscopic specialised policy concern, and its much better to
> > leave it up to a dictatorship to represent them...
> 
> You are letting rhetoric get in the way of thinking.  If you start with
> a false premise, you can conclude anything you want, of course, and you
> have several false premises, both implicit and explicit


False premise? Its a known fact that voter apathy is at an all time high. If
half the USA can't bother itself to drag themselves to the polls, does that
mean that they have in essence given up their voting rights? Should they belong
to some organisation that does their voting for them?

I've already experienced what one organisation did for us that was 'supposed'
to represent us. A big fat zero. Just another way to dilute the votes of those
which the bad policies most affect. 

So, that is your false premise, Kent. I'm just making it a little more clear in
a different context, in which others can easily relate. With a bit of sarcasm
thrown in for good measure.

all the best, Robin
--
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