RE: [ga] DNSO funding and the NCDNHC

["Cochetti, Roger" <RCochetti@verisign.com>]

Milton-

Your comment about my goals or motives is so far off base as to be almost
humorous.

I happen to be a strong supporter of the continued active participation in
the Names Council and the DNSO of the non-commercial constituency and (in
previous incarnations when ICANN was being formed) was one of those who
strongly advocated (and still advocates) a constituency group for the
non-profit sector.

Moreover, I happen to be an active participant in and supporter of quite a
few non-commercial organizations; all of whom I think should be free to
participate in the work of the DNSO if they choose to do so.  In fact, I
think I've done as much as anyone to help the non-profit sector take
advantage of the Internet and participate in the work of ICANN.

Roger  




 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com] 
Sent:	Monday, April 30, 2001 5:51 PM
To:	Milton Mueller
Cc:	ga@dnso.org; Roger Cochetti; icann board address; vinton g. cerf -
ISOC; ICANN-EU
Subject:	Re: [ga] DNSO funding and the NCDNHC

Milton and all assembly members,

Milton Mueller wrote:

> I want to clarify certain aspects of this issue.
>
> As a general principle, I believe that the Non-commercial constituency
should contribute what it can to the support of the DNSO secretariat. It can
and will contribute significantly more than it has.

  I am sure that the ICANN BoD will find this to be a positive sign.  At
least
let's hope they will....  One never knows with the BoD.

>
>
> We've been addressing this issue in the NCC since January, e.g. by
preparing to impose specific membership fees and other fundraising
activities.
>
> We have two objections to the way this is being done.
>
> 1. We are not a pre-existing organization. We were thrown together late in
1999 by the creation of the DNSO. The NCDNHC is simply larger, and more
heterogeneous in composition, than any other constituency, with the ccTLDs
possibly excepted, and has the fewest resources. We need more time to get
the organizational and funding issues resolved. This obvious fact is not
being taken into account by certain members of the NC.

  As you know, the NC in general has been negatively influenced from the
usual
parties/individuals, Milton.  So it should be of little surprise that the
DNSO NC
has taken a predominantly negative view of the NCDNHC.

>
>
> 2. We don't make money off domain names. Unlike every other constituency,
including the ccTLDs. Indeed, there is no significant connection between the
legitimacy of a constituency and its ability to raise money.

  Agreed in your last sentence here Milton.  And a significant but often
overlooked fact.

> We all know that the so-called gTLD "constituency" is not a real or
legitimate constituency at all. It's just one company. It's ability to pay
its share of the $15k has nothing to do with the quality or legitimacy of
its input into DNSO policy processes - it simply reflects the fact that NSI
was given a very lucrative government monopoly some years ago.

  Good point here as well, and one that seems often overlooked as well.  I
refer
to this a nepotism in its ugliest form.

>
>
> This fact, too, has not been taken account of by certain members of the
NC. They have consistently rejected requests by NCDNHC for a smaller
contribution.

  Yes.  And as such it seems fairly obvious that certain members of the DNSO
NC would wish to eliminate the NCDNHC's voice in the DNSO through pricing.

>
>
> The conclusion I come to is that certain members, particularly Cochetti,
wants very badly to eliminate certain members of the NC.

  Yes, this would seem more than obvious to us as well...

>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html