Re: [atlarge-discuss] Draft text for comments - Homepageoptimized for search engines

[espresso@e-scape.net]

At 13:13 -0800 2002/12/09, NameCritic wrote:
>One of the reasons this is impossible without a mission statememnt is
>that
>we know we all agree on the following statements. If so, then what you
>just
>wrote is a mission statement.

Hi again, Chris,

Generally speaking, what the management types mean when they say
"mission statement" is something a shade longer (maybe 25-30
words) than a slogan but is intended to encapsulate what a
company or organization is about (at least at the moment).

In that context, what I tried to write was not so much a
"mission statement" as an attempt to define the organization's
goals in terms of
a) areas of concern on which there seems to be some kind of
vague majority agreement (based on messages since August)
b) language that might make sense to the average person
(literate enough in English to read an ordinary news article
about the Internet but with no knowledge of how it works)
c) reasons why an Internet user might see the organization
as potentially interesting or useful.

Although essentially a paraphrase of your "optimized" text, it
also paraphrases what other people have been saying, at least
as filtered through my own somewhat-overwhelmed brain.

Taking the resulting text through the process of creating
a "mission statement", I'd put together
>IcannAtLarge.org is global internet community whose members
> are concerned about
and
> We believe in an open, bottom-up, democratic process which begins with
> you and other individual internet users.
>
> We believe that together we can make sure that the Internet is
>governed
> and administered for the benefit of all rather than for the benefit of
> certain interest-groups.
to arrive at

"IcannAtLarge.org is a global community of Internet users
 seeking to ensure that the Internet is democratically governed
 and administered for the benefit of all people everywhere"

which at 26 words is a bit long and somewhat less catchy than
one might like. Trying for "mission statement" status, I'd
personally go with something like
"IcannAtLarge.org - Internet users for good governance,
 reliable administration and communication rights for all"
but I'm not sure everyone in our group would subscribe to it.

>On the fair judgement of domain name disputes
>and intellectual property though. Some of us believe their are no
>disputes
>and that trademarks do not apply to domain names unless you file say
>generalmotors.com and try to sell cars. Then if you're a GM Dealer you
>may
>still have the right to do it. Or even a used car dealer who only
>deals in
>GM Cars. Anyway thats a whole other debate, just thinking I really
>would
>like to remove intellectual property looking as if it relates to domain
>names. Just woke up so hope that makes sense.

Actually, the intellectual property question is an issue that
has already come up in several different guises. While I am
personally against the notion that General Motors should be
allowed to sieze the "GM.ca" registered by a George Martin
who sells menswear in Canada (hypothetical) and the "GM.qc.ca"
registered by Gina Mastromonaco who posts her resume and the
small poetry e-zine she edits just because they have trademarked
their GM logo for automobiles, it seems undeniable that just
that sort of thing has been written into the Internet rulebook
by ICANN at the behest of aggressive U.S. corporations.

In fact, this sort of thing causes much concern, especially for
the individual who has no means to defend his/her right to
keep a domain name which was legitimately registered since
the "owner" of a particular trademarked string of letters was
too negligent or too cheap to register the name for themselves.
The notion that somebody with deep pockets can sue the pants off
an individual for being vaguely associated with an informal
group which uses the specific string "icann" in its name has
already cost us two Panel members, however legally dubious or
morally repellent it might be.

I can't really see how our organization could represent the
interests of Internet users without being willing to address
the issues of whether a domain name can be arbitrarily taken
away from the person who registers it for their own use and
whether the decisions of the U.S. courts about these things
can or should be enforced worldwide. That being said, others
may agree that we don't need to specify this on our
introductory Web page.

Just nodding off myself,

Judyth

>----- Original Message -----
>From: <espresso@e-scape.net>
>To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
>Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 3:04 PM
>Subject: [atlarge-discuss] Draft text for comments - Homepage
>optimized for
>search engines
>
>
>> IcannAtLarge.org is global internet community whose members
>> are concerned about issues such as
>>
>> * Your right to have your privacy respected on the Internet and your
>> personal information protected from people who would misuse it
>> (spammers, governments, sellers of marketing data...).
>> * Your right to register a domain name easily and securely, to
>>transfer
>> it to another registrar when you want to, and to fair judgment of
>> disputes about trademarks and intellectual property issues about your
>> domain name.
[snip]

##########################################################
Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
##########################################################
"A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
##########################################################



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