ccSO and Developing Countries interests/Proposal of Workshop: was before Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] ccSO

[Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales]

Milton and all:

Milton Mueller wrote:

> Yet another problem is that the DNSO itself is weak.
> Bypassed by ICANN management whenever convenient - it is noteworthy, for example, that despite a unanimous
> vote led by the "powerful" business constituencies
> the ICANN mgmt has still not invited DNSO to be
> represented on the committee discussing the future of
> country name exclusions. Yet GAC and WIPO and
> Afilias are.

I rememember that Stuart Lynn in Marina del Rey, encouraged the NCDNHC
(and I suppouse he
to all constituencies) to take inniciative to address concerns to the
ICANN Board.  That we don't have
to wait to be invited to submit comments, for example, just we have to
do it.
So I think that before saying that ICANN Board hasn't invited us to form
part of a committee, or to
comment such and such subject, the NCDNHC and the DNSO in general has
all the right to request
invitation or address concerns, or submit comments, opinions, positions,
etc, without the need that ICANN
invite us to do it.
 
> The relevance of this to the ccSO subject:
> if developing country interests recognize the
> failure of DNSO to be a bottom up, fair, effective
> representation method and wish to tie themselves
> to stronger ccTLD registries, how can we blame them?
> Why be the weakest member of a weak appendage
> to the ICANN Structure?
> 
> I think that is what this ccSO debate it all about.

Before advocating Developing Countries interests, I think that all
members of NCDNHC we should meet
and make a list of Developing Countries interests and make an analisis
about which would be the best
way to address it regarding all subjects within ICANN (not only ccSO).

I invite all members of NCDNHC from Developing Countries to form a group
in order to analise which are those
interests and the better way to address it within ICANN (through ccTLD
constituency, through NCDNHC, through even
ISP constituency...yes we have some non-commercial in the ISP
constituency from developing countries, through GAC, etc).
I think we have to do this first before stating that ICANN bottom-up
process doesn't work because they doesn't
take in count the voice of Developing Countries interest.

Also I may remind you that ICANN Board job is not only take in county
Developing Countries interest. Also they have to analize
many things and make decision in the best for the public interest.

I think the first step we can take is about to organize a sort of
Workshop during f2f ICANN meetings, lets say half a day, and it could be
one day previous to the constituencies meetings, similar to those
organized by ISOC in INET, for Developing Countries in order to
specificially adress such concerns and organize the way we will address
them.  As a first step I offer myself to make inquiries to the
Host Commitee for ICANN meeting in Accra to see if they can get for such
workshop a room and the possibilties of getting it without paying
extra.

What all of you think?

Best Regards
Vany 


-- 
Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales, BSEE
Information Technology Specialist
Sustainable Development Networking Programme/Panama
Member of the ICANN's DNSO Non-Commercial Constituency
Tel: (507) 317-0169
http://www.sdnp.org.pa
e-mail:  vany at sdnp.org.pa

Are you a Non-Commercial organization and have a domain name?
Join the ICANN's DNSO Non-Commercial Constituency, ncdnhc.icann-ncc.org