[ncdnhc-discuss] ISOC to bid on .org

Sat Jun 8 13:20:57 CEST 2002

I personally am not a hard liner on the domain name issue, and think
instead that this would be a good way to begin, because the combination of
having a domain and the current whois policy provides a low cost
registration system for voters, and is already designed to identify unique
individuals.   The fact that it is "working" in the CIRA is relevant
information.  The fact that Jonathan Cohen is on both the CIRA and the
ICANN board illustrates that ICANN board me be over reacting to Karl and
Andy's elections.
I'm not really a hard liner even on the issue of at large elections.  I
can imagine ways of organizing a shrunken ICANN where elections really are
not needed, or other systems of electing a board would be ok.  The details
are everything.   But the idea that elections are not feasible or don't
produce good board members isn't true empirically, either for ICANN or the
CIRA.  ICANN would buy a lot of good will by keeping some board seats
through an elected at large, starting with domain name holders, like the
CIRA system, and perhaps enfranchising first the gTLD domain holders, if
the ccTLD folks drop out or don't want to cooperate in a voting system. 
If the Reform Committe was actually listening to feedback and seaking to
compromise, it would allocate seats on the board to an at large election. 
If it doesn't, it is taking a confrontational approach.
When will we get the details on the NomCom?  This is, of course, the way
the ICANN BOD wants to be controlled.
 Jamie

> Hi!
>
> a salient characteristic of the CIRA election is that all voters have
> to be domain-name holders under .ca.
>
> If I remember well our constituency has strenuously opposed such a
> condition for the at-large, and I have upheld the objection repeatedly.
> So any comparison is somewhere between little-relevant and moot at
> least on that basis. BTW the condition seems perfectly right to many in
> the better defined realm of a ccTLD administration.
>
> 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, Kent Crispin wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 10:29:13AM -0400, James Love wrote:
>> [...]
>> >
>> >    Kent, as someone hired by ICANN for at-large.org, do you have
>> >    complaints
>> > about the qualifications of the CIRA elected board members or the
>> > decisions they have made?
>>
>> Your question is, as usual, irrelevant to the point that I made, but
>> to answer it anyway, no, I have no complaints whatsoever about the
>> qualifications of the CIRA elected board members or the decisions they
>> have made.  A difficulty with an election process says nothing at all
>> about the characteristics of the winners.
>>
>> Just to reiterate my point, since you seemed to have deliberately
>> ignored it: a 3% turnout is not usually considered to be very good,
>> and in fact, many people would call it an "apparent difficulty".  I'm
>> sure that CIRA is hoping for a larger turnout this year.
>>
>> There are numerous other issues with your example I could mention --
>> the CIRA election is a very different kettle of fish than the global
>> elections that have been demanded of ICANN.  The CIRA elections are in
>> one country with one legal jurisdiction; the potential electorate is
>> much smaller; the level of cultural diversity in Canada doesn't
>> compare with the worldwide cultural diversity encountered in the ICANN
>> elections; CIRA dealt with 2 languages, ICANN would have to deal with
>> a very large number of languages; etc etc etc.
>>
>> In other words, Jamie 1) there *were* apparent difficulties; and 2)
>> even if there weren't, your example is irrelevant -- my boat club
>> might hold an online election without "apparent difficulty", but that
>> doesn't mean that ICANN elections would be easy.
>>
>> > I asked Jonathan Cohen also on this issue, but have not
>> > heard back.  As you know, Jonathan is on the CIRA board.
>>
>> Yes, I know.
>>
>> Just one more thing: In your usual steaming inneundo style you said
>> above "Kent, as someone hired by ICANN for at-large.org..."
>>
>> I was not "hired by ICANN for at-large.org".  I registered the domain
>> name "at-large.org" back before you heard of DNS, in support of an
>> "at-large constituency" for the DNSO (that was an old term for an
>> individuals constituency).  I have donated that domain name to the at
>> large organizing efforts, and as soon as I can get the paperwork to
>> Joker.com, the registrant information will reflect that.
>>
>> --
>> Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
>> kent at songbird.com                          lonesome."  -- Mark Twain
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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