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

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:47:17 +1300, Joop Teernstra wrote:

>The @large is
>1. an unorganized jumble of all Internet users' diverse interests.
>2. without Charter or Mission statement
>3. without means of the members to contact each other
>4. subject to a Study that may reduce its representation on the Board or do
>away with it altogether
>5. represented by Directors that may be representing interests directly
>opposed to typical DN holders' interests.
>6. top-down and controlled by ICANN staff.
>7. Unable to provide policy formulations to the ICANN Board 
>
>An Individual Domain Name Owners constituency is:
>
>1. formed naturally by people with a common interest-- bottom up and in
>control of its own Charter and destiny
>2. part of the DNSO where Domain  Name Policy initiatives are developed 
>3. a place where any Domain Name Owner gets a chance to be part of the
>policymaking process, (and get the results to the attention of the Board)
>via its own elected officers
>4. a counterweight in the DNSO, giving it an opportunity to be considerably
>more legitimate than it is now.

I think Joop has done a brilliant summary here and would suggest that
the above be included in any report if there is widespread agreement
with it.  

DPF
________________________________________________________________________
<david at farrar dot com>
NZ Usenet FAQs - http://www.dpf.ac.nz/usenet/nz
ICQ 29964527
--
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