Re: [ICANN-EU] Increasing representativeness

["Constantine S. Chassapis" <cschassapis@acm.org>]

Hi all,

To anyone studying statistics, politics, inter-national relations,
intra-national relations, social
psychology, and candidate methodologies, probably, my long (and
enthusiastic) answer to
Mr Bertola will not be a matter of surprise. So, enjoy ... (excuse me for
having many
parentheses within parentheses but while a young student some years ago I
studied Lisp, and
some abuse in the use of parentheses is (from that time on) my problem).


From: Vittorio Bertola <vb@vitaminic.net>
To: <icann-europe@fitug.de>
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2000 7:13 PM
Subject: [ICANN-EU] Increasing representativeness

> ...

> I am the webmaster of the only Italian site devoted to ICANN
> information - then I decided to jump on the other side and be a
> candidate myself, mainly because I was completely unsatisfied by ICANN
> nominees. However, I know that non-German candidates don't have de
> facto any chance to get in the two only available places (maybe they
> had if there were five or six) ;-)


Although I have enjoyed (for the most part) the politeness with which the
German
co-candidates (and simple members@large) have exchanged (so far) their ideas
on the technical
aspects and political dimensions of ICANN, in general and of this election
in particular,
I cannot escape remarking that, mainly, the picture that emerges from the
emails in this
mail-list is a picture of intra-German conflict.

But what one can say. It is a matter of fact that:
(a) From the 35942 european members@large registered, 20475 originated from
Germany (i.e. 57%).
(b) Almost 70% of the world's web traffic comes from the U.S., Japan is
second with 7%, and ...
Germany is third with 5% ! Spanish-language web sites make up less than 2%.
(One can see
the exact reference at my site, here:
http://users.otenet.gr/~kchas/reads.htm ) France and
England are below, and don't search to find Belgium, Luxemburg, or Greece.
(c) The per country majority of nomination candidates originates from
Germany.

So, what is my point?

IF, according to some democratic ethics, undefined yet, ICANN representation
must be made
according to number of users, then clearly, Germany is well placed, and
Africa, for example (imagine,
we are talking a continent here!), is probably, better placed than deserved.

IF, according to some democratic ethics, undefined yet, ICANN representation
must be made
according to number of informed users, then clearly, Germany is well placed,
but, where for example
 is Scandinavia? where is Sweden? Denmark? Norvege? Finland? People (like
us) well informed
on the matters of Internet, know, that Scandinavia has high involvement with
the Internet, both from academia
but also from simple users. For example, my Swedish ant has an email account
while my Greek ant has not!).

IF ICANN representation must be made on the basis of population, then, where
is India, or China? (ok,
this has more to do with ICANN bylaws than the fact that Germany has many
internet users and high
degree of involvement, but it helps form the argument, ok!?)

IF ICANN representation must be made on the basis of cultural uniqueness,
then, goodbye countries
or continents, because there are many many cultural minorities out there
waiting for a forum
to speak (ok, ICANN is not a forum, but go and ask an oppressed person,
"hey, I give you
a place to speak, but you must only speak about technical matters", do you
think that he will
miss the oportunity?)

Define your own democratic ethics, and you will have your own answer! (Or,
your answer will
define your ethics!)

Why I am saying all these?

Because it seems fair that Germany has the lead!

But,
(ok, there is always a "but", but, we are all intelligent, educated,
cultivated people, and the
added value of the discussions in this list, and of what self-organized
entities will come to life from this
endeavour,  is so great, that, I am really happy that most of my symmetry
fulfilling partners in
these dialogues were German!)
I am afraid that both the two positions will be taken by candidates
originated from Germany, that will mainly speak in ICANN about the Internet
and about Europe, the
German way, and the rest of Europe will be out (this is just a fear, things
may turn out differently!).

Ok, it is true that there are the other five nominated persons, but I am
sure, we all agree, we cannot put those five in the same position as OUR
precious two that
we will, after all, nominate. And will support! Because who-ever they will
be, they will be OUR two
people!

>
> Even if we are just at the beginning, I think that there are already
> some lessons we must learn.
>
> The first one is the incredibly high number of candidates, which in my
> opinion constitutes a problem.

No, no Mr Bertola, it is not a problem, it is this that gave birth to these
wonderful
discussions, and, all these candidates, when they will self-organize to a
larger body
they will perform miracles. Believe me!

> With 75 or 100 candidates, nobody will
> ever care to read all presentations. Simply, everyone will search for
> candidates from his own country, take the 3-4 most voted of them and
> choose among them. I'm not so sure that publishing the number of votes
> received by the candidates is helping the democracy of the process
> (basically, all candidates who for any reason did not get endorsements
> in the very first days have no chances) but I also understand that you
> cannot browse a list of up to 100 candidates and this is the "less
> worst" criterion you could think of.
>
> However, I am sure that these 100 candidates do not represent 100
> different views on the matter. This is why I think that the solution
> to this problem is aggregation. This phase of the elections should
> generate, if possible, "alliances" or groups of candidates that share
> a common program and commitments. By the way, I don't think that it is
> possible for anyone to keep in contact with the whole European
> Internet community by himself alone. A network of at least one ICANN
> At Large representative per country should be definitely constituted,
> be it official or unofficial. There should be a virtual regional
> council through which the European At Large Director can get the
> consensus or at least the voices of everyone about important decisions
> to be taken.

I agree and I support that idea. Ideas of this type have already been
proposed by
other candidates too. Yes, we must self-organize! Fast!

Now, here I have an idea:
What if we form such a body, (lets call it the "eubody") and then, here
comes a candidate and says:
"I recognize my limits. I now declare that I will not decide, If  I get
elected, on any matter in the ICANN,
without discussing the matter with eubody! (Maybe he will also declare that
he will wait for the ok from
the eubody, but that probably it goes too far ;-) ). I think that I will
vote for such a candidate, if some
minimum criteria of technical ability and political awareness are satisfied.
(Now, after these days of
intense emailing, I believe, we are able to form a more or less complete
image of all candidates
(even of those that have not spoke, because, the abstention from this list
is a part of the image
of a candidate!))

Sincerely,
Constantine Chassapis