Re: [atlarge-discuss] voting and polling

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>]

Joop - No matter what commentary you came up with below the first time a US
Congressman gets a call from the At Large membership group and it has 10K +
US members the DoC will very quickly start rethinking its ICANN alone
stance. The DoC is easily swayed by one thing and that is the American
Voting Public.

Todd

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joop Teernstra" <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>
To: "todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>
Cc: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>; "atlarge discuss list"
<atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] voting and polling


> At 06:33 a.m. 2/06/2002 -0700, todd glassey wrote:
> >DNSO could easily swamp ICANN if it ever got its act together.
>
> Hmm.
> ICANN has the IANA function and the MoU with DoC.
> ICANN has the funding from the gTLD registry tax.
> ICANN can do with a 9 person staff and remain nimble on its feet ,but the
> DNSO, to be legitimate as a stakeholder body, must lumber itself with a
> large Registrant "parliament" slowed down by democratic on-line
procedures.
>
> Only an automated streamlining of the procedures, such as was proposed
with
> The Polling Booth with its procedural charter , would mean that the DNSO
> would become a real influence.
> I guess this is what you mean by 'getting its act together'.
>
> But it would be an intensely political body. Nobody would be sure of the
> ultimate allegiance of candidates for office. If it would start making
> deals with the GAC, the ccSO, US Congress and the EU, the lobbying power
of
> the big corporate interests now dominating the Names Council would still
be
> undiminished.
>
> Its main function would be to provide ICANN and its operations with
> glasnost and legitimacy.
>
>
> >It represents
> >the only large group of voters that are capable of participating as
> >individuals in the Internet Process. This is a very serious issue since
> >there are so many fracturing influences in the DNSO.
>
> Think this through a bit more, Todd.
>
> >If I was ICANN I would run in fear that DNSO would achieve a real
membership
> >behind a real charter, and start getting active here in the US as a PAC
and
> >not just an independent Internet Only Working Group.
>
> If I was ICANN I would see the above scenario for my DNSO as my biggest
hope.
>
> What I would really fear is a completely independent At Large driven by
> real Individual concerns.
>
>
> --Joop
>


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