[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [discuss] Individual representation
> Furthermore, the 250 individual people who have expressed concrete
> interest by their participation in the lists and the meetings,
> despite their quite vociferous disagreements, indeed represent a form
> of capture. Everybody agrees that there are hundreds of thousands of
> people, at least, who have direct and legitimate standing. There is
> no way that a self-selected group of 250 (us) can possibly be said to
> represent those hundreds of thousands. Instead, we quite clearly
> represent a few special interests.
> So, I disagree -- the capture scenario is very possible, and all the
> REAL evidence indicates that the number of people who will
> participate individually is very low.
I agree with you, the capture scenario is very possible.
Nevertheless, I think that the benefit of having direct involvment by
individuals that would not otherwise fit into a constituency will offset the
risk of capture by a specific interest group.
Let's take your personal case as an example. The way I see it, you could
participate in one of the existing constituencies only by a loose
interpretation of the rules for the said constituency. OTOH, you would fit
perfectly in the Individual Domain Name Holder constituency. And this may
happen to many other people as well.
The fact that 250 self-appointed people cannot claim to represent the
hundreds of thousands is true, but it is also true that these 250 people
have a perspective that is very different from any other DNSO constituency.
Of course some of them may serve other interests, but I prefer to live with
this risk than not to provide representation at the Name Council level for