Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Re: Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines a nd NCDNHC definition

[william@dso.net (William X. Walsh)]

On Tue, 01 Jun 1999 13:54:09 +0100, Jeff Williams
<jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>  Than you will need to choose which constituency you wish to belong to.
>This is the nature of a constituency model to be built within the DNSO.
>I completely disagree with it, but the ICANN Interim Board decided to
>act in Singapore otherwise against the grain of consensus.  Hence you
>have a situation that is by design, divisive, as I and many others have
>pointed
>our before and just after the Singapore conference.  So, as I said you are
>going to have to decide which side of the fence you are going to stand
>from a personal and a professional standpoint under this scheme.  Hence
>as I said, you either are going to be part of the non-commercial
>constituency(S)
>or you are not.  If not than again as I said the non-commercial constituency
>
>is none of your or my concern.

Wrong again.  If my business entity wishes to join the commercial
constituency, it is free to do so.  If my non-commercial entity wishes
to join the non-commercial entity it is free to do so.  If me as an
individual (who also owns a domain name used strictly for
personal/family use) wants to join an individuals constituency, I am
free to do so.

And I won't even touch the part of the ISOC and multiple
constituencies.  ICANN's current position there will not stand.  Mark
my words.



>  Oh, YOU feel, huh?  Well that is fine and dandy!  Than join the NCDNHC
>and make your presence known, or formulate your own non-commercial
>constituency and submit it to the ICANN and the DNSO for their approval.
>But understand that when you do so that it is likely that you will not
>be taken seriously as your and DNO.NET is not a non-commercial organization
>as you will be viewed with a jaundice eye as will your formation of a
>non-commercial constituency as you are going to be viewed as staking
>a position that you are not really associated with...
>

It is DSO.NET, btw, and I am doing just that right now, letting my
positions and presence be known, and discussing it on the appropriate
forums for these discussions.  Unlike Michael, I'm not interested in
being a leader of such a group, and would decline it even if asked.
So I won't presume to develop my own constituency plan for the NCDNHC.
But I WILL presume to point out the flaws with the current structures
that are under consideration.