Re: [atlarge-discuss] Questions for each candidate

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

At 05:58 a.m. 15/05/2003, you wrote:
> 1.  Do you intend to support the formation of Regional At-Large Organizations
> (RALOs) as enumerated in the ICANN bylaws?  Why, or why not?
No.  Our members have rejected the RALO idea.
Why?
1.We have not had any input in these ICANN Bylaw changes.
2. ICANN is global. It's At Large Membership must be global too.
3. We have to cope with our political divisions first, before we also 
introduce geographical division.
4. Our members are free to set up any regional organization that is viable. 
But the main issues are not regional. In the end it is one internet 
user-one-vote that must make the decisions.



> 2.  Which DNS issue is most important to you?  What policy change would you
> recommend to the ICANN Board with respect to that issue?
DNS "issues" become issues, because companies see opportunities or ICANN 
proposes regulation for them. Today it is WHOIS accuracy, delete policy and 
WLS among others. UDRP is already yesterday's battle. IDN.IDN still has to 
start.
  The issues of today may be mild compared with the DNS issues of 
tomorrow. (legislation against alt roots,  internet-death, "what is spam" 
and more on the horizon)

 What I would like to see is an ICANN-recognized Bill of Rights for Domain 
Name Owners that enumerates a number of protections that should be 
incorporated in the registrar contracts.


> 3.  How many At-Large directors should be seated on the ICANN Board?  What
> strategy do you recommend to accomplish that goal?
Frankly I don't know what is politically attainable.  Even 3 *real* at 
large directors are better than nothing. I think it is unrealistic to 
expect much, unless we as an organization become solid , global and 
respectable.

> 4.  Will you participate in lobbying the U.S. Department of Commerce to
> formally re-bid the ICANN contracts?
No.  They don't listen to non-US citizens. And, frankly, better the devil 
you know...

> 5.  ICANN constituencies are required to submit a new charter and statement
> of operating procedures no later than 15 July 2003.  Will you commit to this
> same goal for this organization within the same timeframe?
No. We cannot let ICANN dictate our pace.

> 6.  It costs money to run any organization.  How do you intend to fund this
> organization?
1.membership fees (with exemptions for those who publicly ask for it).
2. member-donations
3. sponsorship by more established non-commercial organizations

> 7.  In your view, what is the mission of this organization?  How do you
> intend to accomplish that mission?
The first Mission is to create a respectable democratic representative 
structure for the interests of Individual DNS users worldwide.
When that is accomplished it is up to the representatives to define a 
further mission with regards to ICANN or any other body that is involved 
with global internet/DNS regulation.
*****
Danny,

These are good questions. Could you also post them in the Forum, so that 
the candidates who are not on this list may reply to them as well?

It will also be easier to post URL's to their replies and collate then on a 
"candidate Statements Page" , easier than finding them in the archives of 
this ML.




-joop-



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