Re: [atlarge-discuss] online voting

[eric@hi-tek.com]

Thank you Mr. Young,

This is a very important point.  Just as so many cannot purchase with a credit
card online they may have to verify locally.

But we are very swiftly working on such mechanisms.  From Hotel access, to
Postal access to Internet Cafe access we are but months away from making such
things a reality through land based verification and Internet registration. No
one knows whether a Chiapan farmer who comes in once a week to email his son in
Tucson Arizona, is real, better than the person running the access. (yes I use
extreme examples to get the point across)
But do not think yesterday or an election in July, think about two years from
now and the principal.

I know that many of you do not want the stuppas like us voting.  But we will be
here in two years still trying to get that vote.

Maybe some of you will get the concept that you are very wise in the Internet
but my low level friends are very wise in knowing that they want to email their
children half an earth away.  And that, stability in domain names helps that to
happen with ease.  Remember the visions of the old telegraph man writing out and
then sending the message for the illiterate farmer, well invision it today with
the Internet.  Marking our X may be nothing to you but to some of us it is huge
and quite a proud moment.  Throughout history allowing the lowest personage to
vote has always elevated the community, please let that be the same here.

Some have just completed a cleft palate and club foot surgical analysis program
using Internet technology, I understand that the program will help save dollars
through efficiency and therefor help more children.  Thank you all for your
continued support of the Internet.

Sincerely,
Eric

Bruce Young wrote:

> Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>
> >In fact, that's exactly what I am thinking of. The original ICANN
> >proposal was to identify people by having them register a domain name
> >and be listed on a WHOIS server - which was an unsecure method, costly
> >for the user, and easily capturable by registries and registrars
> >(though perhaps these were appreciable features for some of those who
> >drafted that proposal).
>
> Ya think?!  :)
>
> The "domain name holder as user" idea was total illogic!  I never bought the
> idea.
>
> > . . . we should employ a wide number of different authentication
> >methods, not necessarily PGP-based (as the target is much less technical).
>
> I agree.    This PGP thing Manoj is working on sounds like the way to go in
> many areas.  But where PGP is impractical, different methods that work best
> in the locale using them need to be considered.  We need to avoid placing
> participation barriers in front of anyone.
>
> Bruce Young
> Portland, Oregon
> Bruce@barelyadequate.info
> http://www.barelyadequate.info
> --------------------------------------------
> Support democratic control of the Internet!
> Go to http://www.icannatlarge.com and Join ICANN At Large!
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de