[atlarge-discuss] Questions for the Ballot

["J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>]

Dear Members,
I wish to add the following questions (which are more a poll of the 
interest of our members and the understanding of the Internet want).

"
Foreword. The "internet" is the gathering of our own networks (global, 
country, trade, organizations, communities, families, etc.) electronically 
supported in usin the TCP/IP protocol set, the IP addressing and the DNS. 
To help the Panel and the other Members to better understand where we stand 
please indicate if you agree (Y/N or A for abstain) with the following 
propositions:

[  ] ICANN has no other power on the internet than to manage the Legacy 
TLDs as the gTLD and the sTLDs.
[  ] ICANN has no power on ccTLDs of which the legitimacy comes from their 
national community
[  ] neither ICANN nor anyone else should have any power on the community 
SLDs, i.e. registries created by SLD Managers to the benefit of their 
community, corporation, clients, family, etc.
[  ] community SLD Managers should create a constituency and become Members 
of ITU to ballance the weight of the ccTLDs and of the sgTLDs.
[  ] this @large community should organize its own community SLD
[  ] domain names should be understood as a service to the users to access 
the site of the registrant and as such the right of the users should 
prevail on the interests of the registrants.
[  ] as such the domain names should be permitted to be life long and free
[  ] as such the conflict resolution should be decided by users juries 
instead of WIPO Panelist and decide in considering common sense in using 
the disputed names first.
[  ] as such the non-ascii scripting users should be able to use domain 
names in their own scripting for the whole domaon name, including the TLD 
(what is refered to ML.ML, as multilingual.multilingual)
[  ] ITU could be a good protection against ICANN's unilateralism, only if 
it creates an "I Sector" matching the Internet needs and culture. I would 
support such an effort and I would participate into an ITU "I Sector" focus 
group (an ITU WG) if it was open to every one, if documents were free.
[  ] I would accept to symbolicaly contribute to the functionning of such 
an open ITU Focus Group if such a ctribution was also permitting an 
identification of the participating Members.
[  ] I am interested in participating into specialized @large WG groups.
[  ] the @large are the members at large of the Internet governance and as 
such are not tied into any particular organization of that governance. And 
each governance oragnization should include an @large constituency.

If yes, please indicate some of the topics you would be interested in:
[  ] e-community governance and management tools
[  ] voting systems
[  ] wi-fi
[  ] universal naming (DNS, Telephone, SMS, GMS, Radio, TV, Domotic, 
Immotic, Teleurbaism)
[  ] IPv6 implementation
[  ] new generation networks
[  ] business constituency
[  ] small business constituency
[  ] individual user constituency
[  ] internet lexical and multilingual dictionnary
[  ] your local community animation
[  ] local relations with ecomical powers
[  ] local relations with political powers
[  ] local relations with consumers organizations
[  ] local relations with press and media
"






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