Re: [members-meeting] Re: [icann-eu] Summary

["Dr. Nii N Quaynor" <quaynor@ghana.com>]

Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
> > ... I would be open to such a model if someone were able to show
> > convincingly that the results of indirect elections are more
representative, fair
> > and democratic than direct elections.
>
> Don't forget that when one goes to indirect elections one foresakes the
> ability to take advantage of the laws of California (and many, many other
> jurisdictions) that give valuable and useful rights to the electors either
> with regard to election processes, inter-elector communications, access to
> corporate information, and rights to vote on various kinds of corporate
> actions.
>
> It is these latter items that have induced the fierce opposition to direct
> elections by those who want ICANN to remain closed system with no public
> accountability.
>
> To my mind, these ancillary benefits are so incredibly valuable that the
> possibility of indirect elections should not even be considered.
>

i agree with Karl. direct elections is preferred.

Nii