[icann-eu] Re: Draft comments on Study Committee

[patrick.mayer@gmx.de]

Harald Alvestrand wrote:

> The argument was raised to me that the (relatively few) persons who
> cared 
> enough to get well informed would also find it easy to participate using
> existing mechanisms, and therefore the At Large is not needed.
> 
> I do not agree - I think a wider participation is good, and the number
> of 
> people who care enough to get informed is not small.

IMHO @large should for one part be configured so that the broad usership
is represented somehow (with all deficits of such indirect representation,
obviously) _without_ anybody having to get duly informed, which would be an
ideal state but is unrealistic as there are other important matters out there
in RL.

I, for example, have certain interests I may or may not find represented
by Andy, but the only way for input on ICANN at the moment is via the
At-Large-elections. That's the whole point in elections, and as I am not involved
with any other constituency, I estimate the At-Large-Process (with all its
deficits ;-)   very much.

Kind regards,

Patrick Mayer



-- 
Rechtsanwalt Dr. Patrick Mayer   patrick.mayer@gmx.de
Informationen zum Medienrecht: http://www.artikel5.de