RE: [wg-review] Constituencies

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

|>-----Original Message-----
|>From: On Behalf Of Kent Crispin
|>Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 1:51 AM
|>Subject: Re: [wg-review] Constituencies
|>
|>The "fluid constituencies" model was discarded as unworkable. 
|> It's one of those things that sounds good at a shallow level, but when 
|>you got to the details no one could figure out a way for it to work.  It sounds
|>good, but in fact it changes the voting structure, which means it
|>changes the decision mechanism, which means that the decision 
|>process is in relatively constant flux, which means ultimately that you need
|>someone to oversee the constituency changes, but who would 
|>that be? The ICANN board was frequently cited as the ultimate oversight body for
|>constituency changes, but the ICANN board simply didn't want to be
|>involved in overseeing a constantly changing structure. 

I would suspect it was discarded as unworkable as it would be very difficult to control.  If you approach all the problems attributed to the model in a systematic manner, it is not unworkable.  That is unless there is an insistance the model not be empowered to be self sufficient and control itself.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

--
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