ICANN Must Account for its Math

[Robin Gross]

The Facts.

Commercial Stakeholder Group Membership.
According to the Business Constituency's website, they have 44 members.
According to the IPR Constituency's website, they have 18 members.
According to the ISP Constituency's website, (they don't publish
membership lists and haven't had a post to their email list in
2009).  But, according the 2006 LSE Report (the last documented
account of the ISP Constituency's membership, they have 42 members.

So if we add the membership of these 3 commercial constituencies
together, we get  total of 104 members in the Commercial Stakeholder
Group, who will elect 6 GNSO Councilors.

Contrast:
NCUC has 142 members but noncommercial users will not be allowed to
elect any of our new GNSO Councilors on the claim that we are too
small to deserve to elect all 6 GNSO Councilors.

Did anyone from ICANN staff/SIC do any math before they ruled non-
commercial users are too small to deserve to elect all 6 GNSO
Councilors?
   NCSG membership = 142 members (allowed 3 elected representatives)
   CSG membership = 104 members (allowed 6 representatives)

What was the decision-making process that led to ICANN's
determination that noncommercial users are too small?  Seriously, we
deserve to know how they arrived at that decision and upon what facts
the decision was based - it is our elected representation that they
are meddling with.  ICANN will have to answer this.


IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090812/d85cebea/attachment.html>