[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [discuss] Individual representation
On Sat, Jun 26, 1999 at 10:31:11PM -0800, Ellen Rony wrote:
> Randy Bush wrote:
> >>> if the academic institution is non-commercial, why would they not wish to
> >>> join the non-commercial constituency?
> If the trademark community is commercial, why would they not wish to join
> the business constituency? This in no way implies that owners of trade and
> service marks would be disenfranchised.
If the registrars and registries are businesses, why don't they
join the business etc etc
The constituencies/GA/AL/SOs are designed to address what were viewed
as coherent interests that should be represented. This is not a
mathematical structure, it is a human structure, and "should be
represented" was defined mainly through the influence of the loudest
voices. You as another loud voice want to add yet more. It won't
make things any better.
The framers of the US constitution were a bunch of self-interested
wise old men went off in private for months and worked to develop a
fairly coherent and simple structure. It was *not* developed
through a "transparent, fair, and open process".
The ICANN formation process, on the other hand was constrained to be
a product of the loudest voices. Not surprising that it isn't quite
Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
firstname.lastname@example.org lonesome." -- Mark Twain