[ncdnhc-discuss] ISOC to bid on .org

[James Love]

Alejandro, saying people were happy might be very good reasoning, if ICANN
had an elected board of directors.  Then it would be reasonable to assume
that if ICANN did screw up, people would take a greater interest, and vote
in some new board members.
The comparisons with the voter turn-out are not exactly the same in any
case.   There were not hundreds of millions of registered voters, and
getting registered wasn't soemthing that many people know about, and even
when they did, sometimes it didn't work.  Same with voting, which
frequently crashed.
More important, how large a turnout would be needed to satisfy concerns
over capture?  I think not too many.   Every 1 percent of a million domain
name registrations is 10,000 votes.   If you have even 1 percent of .org
and .com registrations, a GNSO that allowed domain owners to vote would
have a lot of votes.  More than could be captured by anyone on the NCC
list.
My guess is that the larger the turnout, the worse for those who want to
block introduction of new TLDs and who want to turn ICANN into an IP
enforcement agency.  If we continued to have elections, we would find out.

  Jamie


> Hans,
>
> just to talk a bit, close to the weekend: according to your measures,
> ICANN is a great success and hugely non-controversial, as only a
> thousandth of the population you say is concerned has ever made itself
> apparent. Glad to have you vouch for us.
>
> Or is there something wrong with your reasoning?
>
> Alejandro Pisanty
>
>
> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
> .  .
>     Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
> Director General de Servicios de Computo Academico
> UNAM, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
> Tel. (+52-55) 5622-8541, 5622-8542 Fax 5550-8540
> http://www.dgsca.unam.mx
> *
> ** 10 Aniversario de Internet Society - www.inet2002.org en Washington,
> DC ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, www.isoc.org
> Participa en ICANN, www.icann.org
> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
> .  .
>
>
>
> On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Hans Klein wrote:
>
>> At 07:00 AM 6/7/2002 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
>>
>> >In last years CIRA election they enrolled all voters in a lottery w/
>> >$15000 in prizes, as an added inducement to vote.  In spite of that,
>> >out of 90000 members, ~3000 voted, a 3-4% voter turnout.  You can
>> >spin that how you like, but to me, that is a serious "apparent
>> >difficulty" that doesn't give me a lot of warm fuzzy feelings about
>> >the election, or the future stability of CIRA:
>>
>> I disagree that this voter turnout indicates a problem.
>>
>> As I understand it, there are few controversies over the management of
>> CIRA.  Therefore, there is little to which voters need to hold
>> management accountable.  Hence the low turnout.
>>
>> But let's say the CIRA board started proactively making public policy
>> or was seen to be engaged in inside dealing with its friends.  In that
>> case, one could that voter turnout would greatly increase.  Members
>> would get involved and hold the board accountable.
>>
>> Seen as an accountability mechanism, elections only really kick in
>> when problems arise.
>>
>> I think the same holds for ICANN.  The 2000 elections successfully
>> held the board accountable for its actions, and a number of reformers
>> were elected.
>>
>> If the ICANN board's actions were less controversial (I believe this
>> is definitely possible), then ICANN elections would become boring.
>> That has always been everyone's goal: boring elections that indicate
>> that ICANN is staying out of controversy.
>>
>> Instead, ICANN has proposed to eliminate the elections.  So now we can
>> spend another year or two redesigning this institution or perhaps
>> ultimately junking it.
>>
>> Too bad the ICANN board has not chosen the CIRA model!
>>
>> Hans
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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


-- 
James Love
http://www.cptech.org mailto:james.love at cptech.org
mobile +1.202.361.3040