RE: [registrars] Revised Draft Position

[Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>]

Hello Mike,

I have tried to elevate the process 
> up a level and
> identify sector viewpoints: providers, users, and at-large/government.

I don't really see the distinction between Users and At-Large.

I also think it will be complicated for Governments to be able to agree who
should be on the nominating committee.  You might want to simply allow the
chair of GAC to be on the nominating committee.

You might want to combine users and At-Large into a single block of 10, but
comprising:
internet service providers
small business
large business (e.g AT&T etc)
non-commercial organisations (Universities, non-profit, trade associations
etc)
individual users

The members of the nominating committee should be elected in some way by the
stakeholder groups.


Although we share some of these concerns, I believe 
> it is critical
> that our position paper be positive beacon to lead other 
> constituencies out
> of this restructuring morass.
> 

I agree with this approach.

What I have seen is some groups wanting almost no change - when change is
definitely needed as Stuart's paper clearly points out, and some groups
wanting very radical change (e.g hand over to ITU, or Board directly making
policy with end user elections).

At this stage I advise (1) accepting that change is necessary, (2) trying to
accommodate change within an ICANN structure for stability of the registrars
business.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
>