ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[wg-review]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Partitioning of Interests


Dear Members:

 

We as the DNSO Review Working Group have been charged with actively seeking input from the widest possible set of Internet stakeholders. My observations based on the last posted 500 messages indicate that we have at best 36 active contributors (more than one post each) with only 12 voices accounting for more than 70% of the postings.  From my point of view, this constitutes neither outreach not the “wider debate” envisioned by the founders of this Working Group. 

 

As one of our aims is to define a better bottoms-up consensus procedure, I would challenge you to offer solutions above and beyond the addition of just a few more voices (as represented by the proposals to include additional constituencies).  This will do no more than give us future Working Groups where perhaps 15 people will come to dominate 70% of the dialogue instead of the dozen that now establish “consensus”.  

 

If we seek to vindicate that DNSO will be a structure that will include all of those who will be affected by the DNS of the future as well as the current Netizens, then we need to develop a procedure (perhaps polling under the auspices of an organization like the Carter Center), that can reach a much broader audience in order to legitimize the contention that we are presenting a consensus view.

 

Best regards, Danny Younger



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>