Re: [wg-review] Representative Figures

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 03:28:48PM -0500, Sotiropoulos wrote:
> Kent raises an interesting point.  Just how
> representative of the ICW are the NC and the
> current DNSO?  I have compiled the available
> figures below:
> 
> 
> Without the unverifiable number of IP Constituency
> Members, that makes for a total of approximately
> 562 members (of all consituencies of the DNSO)
> being represented on the NC.

We've been around this tree before.  The BC, IPC, and ISP constituencies
have members who are organizations and/or organizations of
organizations.  For example, the International Chambers of Commerce is a
member of the BC -- it has thousands of businesses *and
associations of businesses* who are members, and thus the ICC can 
legitimately claim to represent at some level perhaps a million 
individual companies.

That's an extreme example, but in general it is safe to say that those 
three constituencies represent the interests of a very broad set of 
their defined populations.

The registrar and registry constituencies actively represent a large 
percentage of their representative populations.

The non-commercial constituency is probably the least representative of 
its defined population, but it has organizations with many thousands of 
members. 

> The question is:  Is this an adequate figure of
> representation to claim anywhere near sufficient
> consideration of the interests of the Internet
> Community as a whole?

Within their respective classes, there is absolutely no question that 
the constituencies are in general quite representative.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
--
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