[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [icann-eu] Draft comments on Study Committee
- To: Harald Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>
- Subject: Re: [icann-eu] Draft comments on Study Committee
- From: Marc Schneiders <marc@schneiders.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 00:45:02 +0100 (CET)
- cc: Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>, icann-europe@fitug.de, members-meeting list <members-meeting@egroups.com>
- Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
- In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001122191345.05fa6ee0@127.0.0.1>
- Sender: owner-icann-europe@fitug.de
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, at 19:17 [=GMT+0100], Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> At 17:31 22/11/2000 +0100, Marc Schneiders wrote:
> >"Board Members should be elected from membership or other associations
> >open to all" is what we could focus on, though people might invoke
> >the next half sentence to let this disappear. If I read it correctly,
> >it does say that in any case there must be directors that are elected
> >by users. Only the process is open, not the result.
>
> FYI, the IETF, ARIN, RIPE and APNIC all regard themselves as open
> organizations - in the sense that anyone who wants to be a member can be.
>
> The DNSO supporting organizations are all open to the relevant organization
> types (at least in theory).
> W3C and ETSI will be happy to let in any organization that pays the fees, I
> think. ITU is controlled by members who are controlled by governments.
>
> There are a lot of paths that people are calling "open". The At Large just
> happens to be the shortest (and so far least organized) path.
Are the organizations you mention or at least some of them, "open to
*all*"? Would it be possible for a 100,000 people to join them?
Or are you telling me in a friendly manner, I did not understand what
the white paper is referring to? That is possible, naturally.
--
Marc Schneiders (rest in header)