Re: [ga] Individual domain name holders and the DNSO

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto.gaetano@voila.fr>]

Joop,

Sorry for the late reply - I misplaced the message in the wrong folder.

As this thread is no longer active, I will limit myself to a couple of 
comments.

You wrote:

>>OK, let's start from here.
>>IDNO is a component of the constituency, but I am afraid (learning 
from 
>>the past and trying to interpret the actions from the Board) that if 
it 
>>will continue being the only one, we will not go very far.
>>
>
>Hi Roberto,
>
>Who's We? The Individual Domain Name holders?  The DNSO? The GA? You as
 a
>proxy for the Board? The special NC task force, acting as a proxy for 
the
>Board? 
>Please clarify.

The people who want to advance on this issue, and who want to have a 
better representativity of the diverse interests in the Internet.
It does not necessarily identify completely with the Individual Domain 
Name holders.

> ......
>Why do you want to dilute the Domain Name holder aspect of our
>representation? 

I don't want to necessarily dilute it, but my reasonment is simple.
If things stay as they are, in terms of support, we (in the sense above)
 will not go very far. In fact, we will not move at all: we will just 
have the same answer (or no answer) as before.
Are we able to bring in other groups to build a wider alliance, and push
 together? My answer is "yes". Will this dilute the "pure" initially 
envisaged project? "Yes".
We have to choose between getting something (but not all) and getting 
nothing.
 
>
>
>(remember my 
>>position in Yokohama?), is because I have the impression that we are 
>>stalling. 
>
>We are stalling, because the NC's task force is stalling. Ken Stubs 
told me
>in Yokohama to be ready for a lot of questions. Well, it is now 2 
months
>and we still haven't heard a peep from the NC. 

It does not matter much who is causing the stall.
What matters is how to get out of it.

Imagine yourself in the cockpit of a stalling aircraft: when it starts 
sliding sideways, you don't ask yourself "Gee, how did we get into this?
 Whose fault is it?", you just give full throttle, nose down, wheel in 
the direction of the slide, and pedal in contrary direction. Then you 
have a chance (if you're fast enough).

>
>>With an AtLarge Membership on the hundreds of thousands, an 
>>application from few hundred individuals will not be enough.
>
>We were there with the DNSO constituency proposal long before the AL 
masses.

So what?
It is there now, and everybody will make the comparison.

>
>Do you mean that  the GA ask Jamie and ISOC to recommend that their
>Individual Domain Name owning members join the new DNSO 
constituency....?

No.
I recommend we negotiate to get the full weight of existing 
organizations to the project of enhancing democracy in the DNSO and 
enlarging the participation to the decision-making process (that is in 
the Constituency system and the DNSO, not in the GA).


>
>>- the AtLarge membership in itself, even if not organized (yet), has a
 
>>potential interest in participating in DNSO debates, and thus to push 

>>for an Individual Constituency
>>
>
>As you say, the At Large Membership is totally unorganized and all it 
can
>do is vote for pre-selected Board members (and perhaps some self-
nominated
>ones). Who is going to bootstrap its bottom-up organization?  Is one of
 the
>newly elected AL directors supposed to do that?

It depends on the Director ;>)


>How long do you think that will take?
>
>>IMHO, while I am looking forward to IDNO to grow, I keep my point that
 
>>we have to look also in other directions if we want to have good 
chances
>> to succeed.
>>
>Again that "we".   
>The current members of the IDNO constituency should be free to let the 
NC
>know if they want their DN interests to be diluted by other interests. 
 
>If a compromise is needed, they will decide by way of a Vote.
>(pardon for the cross-post to idno-discuss, but our members need to be
>aware of this discussion)

Makes sense to me.
When is the vote?

And if the vote is "no", would the IDNO oppose the creation of new 
constituencies that are not exactly according to its wishes?

Feel free to fwd to IDNO.

Regards
Roberto
--
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