Re: [ga] rolling up the sleeves.

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Sat, 22 Sep 2001 13:08:26 +1200, Joop Teernstra
<terastra@terabytz.co.nz> wrote:

>The ALSC has now also come up with Individual DN Holders as "members" of ICANN.
>If in their final position the criteria for membership of the two will be 
>alike , then obviously, the two will merge.
>(In the near-final draft of the ALSC they are not alike--the draft speaks 
>about "contact" in their current definition of Individual Domain Name Holder.)

I would put it stronger than that.  The more I study it the more I
believe that what the ALSC has proposed will not be anything like a
true voice for individuals but a mixture of the Business and IP
Constituencies which will merely allow others to join.  With possible
annual fees of US$100 it will in fact destroy the at large membership
while being used as a justification for not needing more individual
representation.

>The DNSO constituency role is to be actively involved with policymaking and 
>al Large members who are satisfied with electing regional directors or 
>involvement in regional councils can restrict their participation to that.
>Participation in the work of the DNSO would be the logical proving ground 
>for candidate at Large Directors.
>
>But the at Large is still in the future. The DNSO and its Individuals 
>Constituency is here and now.

I agree that work on an individuals constituency until such time as
the DNSO is changed.

>The Task Force now has a proposal to look at.

But unfortunately a proposal put together by just one person with no
effort at consensus or wide-spread participation.  

If the proposal though is open for modification then I would suggest
the GA itself would be the best place to debate it to get wide
participation.

DPF
--
david@farrar.com
ICQ 29964527
--
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