Re: [atlarge-discuss] Democracy and it's Borders

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

I agree with this proposal, James, which can be powerfully developed through
www.atlarge.org

Unfortunately when we tried to get the use of www.atlarge.org (which Marc
Schneiders has kindly offered to us for our use) the panel voted 4 for, 4
against, and 1 abstention - so the effort was stalled.

Unless and until we proceed with this democratic, open and powerful concept,
I fear the At Large Nation (to use your terms) will remain splintered,
scattered and easy to marginalise.

We need a rallying point : an At Large space open and available to all. We
must not block this. How we develop www.icannatlarge.org is OUR business and
our responsibility. But Icannatlarge.org is only part of the "At Large
Nation". We may do well. We may do badly.

Yet, even at this moment, there is nothing to stop the initiation of an open
At Large web space, which is not just defined by nations (as you propose)
but is also Trans-Group (as Joop suggests).

In my opinion, Joop and you are talking great sense, and I just hope that
this can be furthered through IcannatLarge.org. It does not have to be. If
IcannatLarge.org does not want to espouse this Greater At Large concept,
then some of us can initiate it anyway - because although we are members of
IcannatLarge.org, we are also members of the greater At Large community of
ordinary users all over the world.

We can initiate this at almost any time. We have the contacts. We have
people keen to get to work on a nation by nation basis. Indeed, many members
of IcannatLarge.org may also want to subscribe to the broader At Large
construct and be part of a broader alliance AS WELL as IcannatLarge.org

It is getting close to decision time on whether to do this through
IcannatLarge.org or through a grouping of people who share the vision.

The benefit of using subdomains of a single point of identity is that it
allows diversity and freedom of expression, while building up the group
identity of the At Large in a coalition which will publicly demonstrate the
opposition to Icann and the shared vision of an Internet run by its users.

This, in turn, has significant implications for the emergence of a new
democratic frontier for the whole world.

Richard H

----- Original Message -----
From: Jkhan <Jkhan@MetroMgr.com>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 9:16 AM
Subject: [atlarge-discuss] Democracy and it's Borders


Jeff:

Thanks Jeff, I appreciate your commentaries in small doses ;-]

>  I am not sure what you mean by "Sub Domains"?

In this case Sub-Domains are used as a unique identifier. For example the
http://www.Navaho Nation.Arizona.Atlarge.com, here you have a group
identified as the Navaho. in the state of Arizona. and member of the
Atlarge.

The variation is also true, http://Arizona.Navaho Nation.Atlarge.com here
the Arizona. members the Navaho Nation. of the Atlarge. are identified.

The right to left classifier can be confusing.

Jeff, In my opinion (and I maybe wrong) the ccTDLs classification system is
limiting. Consider this:

There are 961 unique Languages (fyi: Microsoft publishes 57 of these in MUIs
/ Multilingual User Interface pacs) , I had last counted (see:
http://www.worldlanguage.com/Languages/  ) . There are also a great number
of Nations, for example consider the Nations of the American Indians.
People identify themselves by the language they speak and groups they
identify with. 'They' choose to put "Construction" upon this.

Countries are bound by their geographies, thus so are the ccTDLs.

The possibilities are as Boundless; as one person / one voice. However our
goal* is to be united in the 'Recognition' of this, the respectful
opportunity of having recognition to the point of, one person one voice. [*
Utopian]

>Do you mean 3rd level Domain names for this structure for chapters by
country or region?

Yes & No, as I refer to my comments above, we must agree to find a level
which supports a 'Manageable' system, that is inclusive by nature. I think
'Nation-States' are a good starting point.

Addendum:  I would also like to point out that there is a danger of loosing
many of our 'Linguistic species and Tribal Nations' if they are not
included, and overlooked.

James









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