[ncdnhc-discuss] Names council candidates

[Dany Vandromme]

Chun Eung Hwi wrote:
> 
> Dear Dany and others,
> 
> On Sat, 8 Sep 2001, Dany Vandromme wrote:
> 
> > 1) Accountability would be certainly better achieved if there is some
> > natural link or channel between the elected AL board members and the
> > voting base. This is aimed in the ALSC proposal. It is certainly not
> > achieved today with the current process, in which the at-large role is
> > only to vote once a while. There is no point to fight for 9 Al directors
> > if there is no mechanism for accountability.
> 
> You are right except that at least less than half of at large board
> members would certainly make ICANN less accountable.
-
I do not agree. All SO elected directors are really elected and
accountable. I do not feel that it is the case today for the at-large
elected ones, since the atlarge is completely undefined and unorganized.
My point is not to argue about figures (6 or 9 for instance), but to be
sure about the real accountability. To me, the ALSC goes in the right
direction and answer all 5 questions which he had to answer.
-
> 
> > 2) From others' contibution, there is a big confusion between the
> > NCDNHC, which is made (supposely) from non-commercial ORGANISATIONS, and
> > the At-Large which is made from individuals. If NCDNHC starts to behaves
> > like an At-Large, that would mean that the constituency is voiced only
> > by individuals rather than organizations.
> 
> Your statement is not clear, but NCDNHC has much more common base with at
> large members than any other constituency could do because they are
> non-commercial and users or customer rather than provider or supplier.
-
I agree the NCDNHC may have more common interest with the atlarge, but
they still should be distinct. NCDNHC is made, in principle from
organisations. At Large is made from individuals. It would be naive to
think that individuals and non commercial are identical.
-
> Your argument that NCDNHC is different from At-Large Members is generally
> acceptable, but it is definitely wrong that NCDNHC should be different
> from At-Large Members. Don't be confused!
-
See remark above. I certainly do not agree with this last statement.
There is to much opposition between commercial vs non commercial in all
ICANN debates. This is biaising the whole discussion in everything. I am
afraid that it is also going to biais the current DNSO director election.
Dany
-
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Chun Eung Hwi
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Chun Eung Hwi
> General Secretary, PeaceNet | phone:     (+82) 2- 583-3033
> Seoul Yangchun P.O.Box 81   |   pcs:     (+82) 019-259-2667
> Seoul, 158-600, Korea       | eMail:   ehchun at peacenet.or.kr
> ------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dany VANDROMME                    |  Directeur du GIP RENATER

                Reseau National de Telecommunications
         pour la Technologie, l'Enseignement et la Recherche

                                  |  ENSAM
Tel   :  +33 (0)1 53 94 20 30     |  151 Boulevard de l'Hopital
Fax   :  +33 (0)1 53 94 20 31     |  75013 Paris
E-mail: Dany.Vandromme at renater.fr |  FRANCE
--------------------------------------------------------------------