[ga] Re: At-Large Supporting Organization

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

Karl Auerbach's comments are excellent.

Vint must surely know and understand (as an intelligent man) that the ALAC
initiative is a top-down damage limitation exercise, an effort to legitimize
the removal of elected AtLarge representatives from the Board. While
purporting to offer the At Large a voice, it is deaf to the clearly stated
demands of the At Large movement for elected Board members, to represent the
largest of all constituencies : the millions of ordinary internet users. The
At Large constituency is a vocal and self-organising movement, and it has
not asked to be "organised" by Denise Michel, nor has it asked for an ALAC
which would effectively reduce its influence on the Board to nil. This ALAC
initiative is being imposed, from the top down.

ICANN's original mandate, as it was set up to administer this world
resource, included a recognition that ordinary internet users would be
effectively represented in the running of the organisation, as a balance to
those interests who were commercial rather than not-for-profit in their
legitimate motivations.

That Internet governance was of concern to many users could be seen by the
thousands of people who participated in Board elections for AtLarge
representatives - elections which, if not perfect, were nevertheless
productive, but which have now been stripped away cynically.

It is also fair to say that the ongoing levy charged to all domain name
registrations worldwide so as to provide ICANN with a larger budget
constitutes "taxation without representation", an oppressive practice which
runs counter to the principles by which the United States governs itself.
Ordinary internet users are financially supporting ICANN with vital
revenues, and yet are increasingly excluded from its decision-making
processes.

It's pretty clear that ICANN has been working to eliminate the democratic
elements to which it committed itself under the current mandate, to
disenfranchise Internet users,  and stifle all criticism even within its own
committees (the ALSC having clearly recommended continued representation of
the Internet-using public on the ICANN BoD, etc.). Reasonable people now
recognise that ICANN is evading its responsibilities to the public, and (as
Danny Younger spells out) resorting instead to a kind of symbiotic
dependency on vested interests whose influence far outweighs the rights and
legitimate concerns of the ordinary user.

That being the case, many people now believe it would be extremely unwise
for DoC to renew ICANN's mandate without concurrently spelling out
obligatory provisions and time-limits to ensure that a mechanism for a fair
and open election process for representatives of the Internet-using public
around the world, is re-instated. This re-instatement of the principles of
the original mandate would go some way to restoring public confidence in
ICANN, and act as an insurance against future attempts by the ICANN Board of
Directors to operate this not-for-profit organisation as an ever-expanding
corporation, lacking in credible accountability.

If Vint Cerf seriously thinks that ICANN's "imposition" of an ALAC is
acceptable to the At Large constituency, in place of the elected Board
directors it has eliminated to suppress dissident opinions, then I believe
he is mistaken.

Everyone knows that this is really about suppressing the voice of the At
Large. The ICANN Board cannot handle the presence in its midst of Directors
who voice awkward questions, demand accountability, and speak for ordinary
users.

I hope Nancy Victory and DoC will make the renewal of ICANN's mandate
conditional on the restoration of those Board members who most clearly
represent public opinion and the public interest. It is, after all, in the
US interest as well, for ICANN to have credibility and to be seen to be
truly representative.

Kind regards

Richard Henderson




--
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