[ncdnhc-discuss] clarification (sort of) on ICANNatlarge.com and other ICANN "at-large" things

[todd glassey]

Thanks Jefsey-
----- Original Message -----
From: "J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey at club-internet.fr>
To: <discuss at icann-ncc.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] clarification (sort of) on ICANNatlarge.com
and other ICANN "at-large" things


> Bravo, Todd. You are IMHO on the good track. The ICANN's difficulty is the
> transition from the ".arpa" culture to the international/multinational
> culture. We all share difficulties in that transition because some matters
> are local and others are netwide and multinationality is something new to
> individuals.
>
> Some also - as in the US case - have more impacts on the networl. But this
> is probably a temporary thing: coming to normal ways - such as a
> considering the local Internet communities - can only help the
> normalization of the whole ICANN.  But we should not in the process lose
> the multinational experience,  and should work out good relations among
> associations and real cross association specialized groups.
>
> The NCC certainly could be a good spot to try that, capitalizing on the
> existing ties and experience? We need local seeds, but wa are so few.
> Grandiose visions such the IDNO shown they are complex to develop.

The IDNO would then be a congress of the various Domain Owner/Operators
Association's... if it had its act together... See that is the real IDNO
win. Making the IDNO itself the point of contact rather than the regional
organizations is a bad idea I think as demonstrated by the several years
worth of infighting and wars between the IDNOP principals...

Todd


> As you
> know we plan to initiate a project in France along the same idea this
> falls, having been late before the vacations. US and France are the two
> most representated countries in the DNSO. Why not to try to help each
other
> creating something concrete. Outreach is a real pain, with a (s)low
> response. Sharing experience and results might help. I suppose Germany -
> large number too - Australia and NZ, very active - could also have their
> own effort.
>
> The @large will provide us a good number of new interested and interesting
> people. But the NCC is the place for their association.
> jfc
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 23:19 18/07/02, todd glassey said:
>
> >Personally from all the noise on this list I am beginning to think that a
> >smaller US-Only Domain Owner/Operator's Association is in order. Its
intent
> >would be to protect the rights and capabilities of US Domain Owners as a
> >whole. It would present to IDNO/ICANN and to the US Congress as
> >representative of the voting American Citizens that own operate or
> >administer domains and their interests.
> >
> >Anyone else have any commentary on that?
> >
> >Todd
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
> >To: "Alexander Svensson" <svensson at icannchannel.de>
> >Cc: "NCDNHC Discussion" <discuss at icann-ncc.org>
> >Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 7:14 AM
> >Subject: Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] clarification (sort of) on ICANNatlarge.com
> >and other ICANN "at-large" things
> >
> >
> > > Alexander Svensson wrote:
> > > > You are (mis)portraying ICANNatlarge.com and the ALOC as two
> > > > competing entities. In fact, ICANNatlarge.com is represented
> > > > /on/ the ALOC. But I'm not trying to defend what the ALOC does
> > > > or doesn't do: The point is that I believe it would be a bad
> > > > idea if user organizations started to fight against each other
> > > > to become the Single Authoritative Voice of the Users. I
> > > > believe we need an interface between a multitude of user
> > > > organizations and ICANN. And someone has to reach out to
> > > > user organizations worldwide (which is what Denise Michel is
> > > > doing). Of course, that interface must be composed of and
> > > > elected by user organizations in the end.
> > >
> > >     I guess this is something that people will disagree about.  I
don't
> > > think it is unimportant that the Denise/Esther effort has hijacked the
> >term
> > > "at-large" and turned it on its head to bless a decidedly undemocratic
> > > effort.     Maybe some others feel differently.   By the way, how does
the
> > > Esther/Denise effort get its own legitimacy?  And has the at-large
> > > organizing committee have any proceedures, ways of electing leaders or
any
> > > real role other than to make ICANN look like it has a real voice for
> >users?
> > >
> > >    Jamie
> > >
> > > --
> > > ------
> > > James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
> > > http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love at cptech.org
> > > voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Discuss mailing list
> > > Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> > > http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Discuss mailing list
> >Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> >http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> >
> >---
> >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> >Version: 6.0.373 / Virus Database: 208 - Release Date: 01/07/02
>