[ncdnhc-discuss] ICANN committee recommends voting restrictions,fewer At-Large di rectors

[Barbara Simons]

The public is NOT another special interest group!

To clarify what I said in my earlier posting (sorry for
the extra email), if the public is relegated to a minority
position on the Board, it will in essence be disenfranchised.

ICANN has several powerful well funded special interests;
they will hold the vast majority of the Board seats - enough
to guarantee that even more repressive bylaw changes can pass ...
and the public be damned.  Yes, Dave, it is the real world
of decision making - where money and power are all that matter.

Whenever someone makes a posting saying that the at-large
should negotiate with other groups, repeat over and over again:

The public is NOT another special interest group!!!

Barbara

Barbara Simons wrote:

> Yes, the risk is that a group of democratically elected
> Board members might be able to influence ICANN policy.
> Barbara
>
> Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> > At 04:17 PM 8/28/2001, Barbara Simons wrote:
> > >the ALSC's recommendations guarantee that the
> > >public can be outvoted in every regard, even if the at-large
> > >representatives were all to vote in a block
> >
> > You are exactly correct.  If you were wrong, then it would mean that the
> > at-large constituency would be the sole authority for ICANN.  That's called
> > capture.
> >
> > Hence it means that the at-large constituency must learn to collaborate
> > with other groups, if it wishes to have a constructive effect.
> >
> > Welcome to the real world of practical group decision-making.
> >
> > d/
> >
> > ----------
> > Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
> > Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
> > tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss