[wg-review] Voting Rights

["Babybows.com" <webmaster@babybows.com>]

Dear Kent,
     A contract is a business relationship, jointly entered into for
mutually satisfying reasons.  Those parties that have entered into a
contract with ICANN are not "governed" entities in a democracy; they are
contractors who have agreed to abide by current and future policy provisions
established by the ICANN Board.   Policy decisions will clearly impact these
contracting parties, but they have placed their trust in ICANN (which will
only create new policies as a result of a consensus process) to reasonably
protect their interests.  As ICANN is a California Non-Profit Public Benefit
Corporation, consensus decisions ostensibly should stem from the Public for
the Benefit of the Public; as such voting rights in a policy-recommending
body such as the DNSO should accrue to the Public moreso than to Special
Interest Groups (as represented by the current constituency structure).
     While you are correct in your assessment of the GA as an "activity",
rather than a "body", I would argue that this need not be the case, and is
in fact a matter that could be changed by an amendment to the By-Laws.  I
see a need for greater public participation in the DNSO, and believe that
enhancing the power of the GA through granting it seats on the Names Council
would be an effective way to increase Public participation.

--
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