RE: [wg-review] 11. IDNH

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

> From: Greg Burton [mailto:sidna@feedwriter.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:52 AM
> 
> At 11:30 AM 1/15/01, Roeland Meyer wrote:
> >Do I have to resubmit all the arguments against 
> constituencies, under the
> >correct headers?
> 
> Of course not :)
> 
> It seems to me we have three separate issues:
> 
> 1. If constituencies are the electors for the NC - which they 
> currently are 
> - the creation of specific constituencies, like the proposed IDNH

Under these terms, yes. We need an IDNH.

> 2. If constituencies are the electors for the NC, how should 
> constituencies  be created?

Currently, they are by executive fiat (ICANN BoD). There is no other
mechanism and the existing one doesn't work. I submit that we, as a
collective, do NOT know how to do this and we may never know. Like Weinberg,
I don't think consensus is possible there. Also like Weinberg, I don't
believe that any method will be equitable, or even acceptable, to those not
constituted.

> 3. Whether or not constituencies should continue as the 
> electors for the NC

This is what I think is currently wrong. They should not, for the reasons I
gave above.

> I'm suggesting that work on creation of specific 
> constituencies be moved to 
> the GA list, but that doesn't affect 2 or 3. It seems to me 
> that if we can 
> focus on those two issues - in separate threads - we won't 
> get as confused 
> about which is which. None of that means reposting arguments 
> already made, 
> unless of course they need to be referenced currently.
> 
> Does this make sense?

Yes, move the entire issue of which new constituencies to form, into the GA,
and concentrate on, if we even continue the constituency model in the first
place. This latter discussion may make the first issue moot. If we eliminate
constituencies then the GA has nothing to discuss there.
--
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