[ncdnhc-discuss] Membership Status ofSiliconValleyPublicAccess Link

[Kent Crispin]

On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 10:01:49AM +0900, Chun Eung Hwi wrote:
> Dear Vany and others,
> 
> With regard to this issue, I think Adam is basically right because I
> believe it a right procedure for raising up a quesiton. But Vany's comment
> seems to be irrelevant because in our constituency, the contact point of
> one member organization is closely associated with the organization
> itself.

I don't believe that is true in general for non-commercial 
organizations.  There are many many non-commercial organizations that 
run almost entirely off of volunteer effort, and many of those 
volunteers work for commercial companies.

> The contact point has the voting right and plays the role of
> communication with that organization. Therefore, so far as our charter
> clearly excludes those organizations which use the Internet primarily for
> commercial activity, it is absolutely inappropriate for any person, who
> engaged in those activity and moreover in those activities that ICANN has
> some direct relations in its interests, to take the contact point of
> non-commerical constituency.

Nonsense.  You are manufacturing conflict.

1) There are non-commercial registries; there is absolutely
no compelling reason to exclude them from voting participation in the
NCC.  

2) Despite the fact that the question has been raised many times, no one
has ever articulated a clear description of why the interests of
commercial and non-commercial entities would differ greatly as far as
the domain name system is concerned.  I have concluded that the reason 
for this failure is because there is no compelling difference between 
the interests of commercial entities and non-commercial entities as far 
as the domain name system is concerned.


-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
kent at songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain