RE: [wg-review] We are in the starting line......

[Greg Burton <sidna@feedwriter.com>]

At 06:48 PM 12/26/00, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>So, if enough folks decide that they want to get together to form an
>"Intellectual Property" constituency - that's their choice - but the power
>of that constituency would be exactly the number of individual voters
>that it can convince of the merits of its position.

Interesting concept, although I can see certain problems re:funding the 
DNSO if adopted. I can also see problems with "tyranny of the majority" 
issues. A formal constituency structure, while liable to the problems you 
have pointed out in the discussions regarding the word "stakeholders", also 
does at least give a recognized minority some voice. (Of course, the 
perhaps majority of the GA, personal/individual/small business domain 
holders, have no voice at all under the current situation.)

Then again, what's to prevent Incredibly Big Machinery Corporation, or 
NanoSquish, or some other (made up) large company from urging their 
employees to join and vote the party line? No change at all, under those 
circumstances.

However.....I think I could go for something that kept the constituency 
structure and made it more fluid (ie, easier for a constituency to disband 
or be created), allocated 1 NC seat per constituency, and allowed the 
remainder of the NC to be elected by the DNSO. That's off the top of my 
head - I'm sure any problems with the idea will be addressed at length :)


Regards,
Greg