Re: [atlarge-discuss] A Different Approach

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 05:43 p.m. 15/02/2003, DPF wrote:
> For many years a lot of people have worked hard to have a mechanism
> where individual internet users can have input into ICANN.  But both
> the IDNO and now icannatlarge.org have ended in failure.  IDNO spent
> several years trying to get things to happen but died and this
> organisation in a year has failed to even agree on the most basic
> things and has now lost almost every panelist.
The IDNO is not really dead and still has a structure and a website here: 
www.democracy.org.nz
Only the last discuss list archives have been "disappeared"  by WXW to 
cover up his massive efforts to kill it.  Did the members vote for disbanding?
Do you know that new members are still  signing up  for the Cyberspace 
Association?
It is true that the potential leadership for IDNO  has been inactive. 
Somebody has to re-boot it again. It has the advantage of an existing set 
of Bylaws that stipulate a process of accountability and voting. These 
Bylaws can be refined and flaws and omissions can be fixed. It can be tuned 
for the new ICANN situation and the new GNSO. Better than starting with 
nothing.

Neither has icannatlarge ended.

What icannatlarge is about is not the same as demanding representation of 
Individual Domain Name Holders within the new GNSO.

ICANN has rebuffed that petition before with the argument that the 
Individuals would get their representation through At Large directors and 
had an ALSC tell us that At Large membership would be restricted to Domain 
Name Holders.

If 15 of our best (integrity, knowledgeability) people would choose to 
spend their energy on a GNSO focused petition, could that not in effect 
kill the icannatlarge user representation effort and leave that field to 
the ALOC? If icannatlarge becomes ALOC and "succeeds" with ICANN, would 
there be *any* chance for an independent "new-IDNO" to be let into the cosy 
GNSO???


It is all very well to be complementary, and I agree with the goal, but can 
this group give up  that many active people in exchange for a very likely 
"NO, go away" at the end of the GNSO tunnel?

David , one more thing, I agree (obviously, since I have tried to walk the 
same path before and leart my l;essons) with much that you say about 
working effectively, but why are you asking people to contact you privately?

Why not a public show of hands, or a public listing on the web, so that 
everyone can determine for him/herself  with whom  (s)he wants to be 
associated.



-joop-



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