KASWESHA APPLICATION

[Milton L Mueller]

> How does the NCSG-EC reconcile inclusion with rigid rules?
> 
> --
> Cheers,
> 
> McTim

I would answer as follows. First, it is written into the charter as a requirement. The charter can be changed, but most of us would probably agree that the EC should apply the charter's eligibility requirements rather than make them up arbitrarily as we go along. I can envisage some of the same people complaining that we did NOT apply the rules if and when we start making exceptions to them. 

So that means this is really a debate about the wisdom of that particular eligibility requirement. So let's have that debate. 

Reasons for: this requirement goes back to the origin of the DNSO. Indeed, it was practically imposed on us by ICANN staff at the time, and was strenuously fought for by people in the internet technical community whose profile is very similar to yours, Tim. 

The idea was that to be a stakeholder in the management of DNS you have to be a domain registrant. The idea was that ICANN's DNSO/GNSO was not a generalized representation of Internet users but a representation of domain name holders. General internet users were supposed to be represented via the At Large. 

The trade-off here should be clear. If you shut the door to non-domain registrants, you end up excluding organizations like Kaswesha. If you open the door to the Kasweshas, then who does the GNSO really represent, and who else comes in that door? Why should people who do not even have domains be establishing policy preferences for people who do? Furthermore, once you sever the link between representation and domain ownership, the problem of verifying legitimate members becomes a lot harder. If you tell me that you are Mr. Smith and hold domain mrsmith.name, the EC can verify that. If you apply as a general Internet user with no domain, the issue of who you are and who you represent becomes a bit trickier, and more open to manipulation. I don't see this as a huge problem, but it is a problem. 

When drafting the NCUC charter several years ago, I think the reasoning was that having your own domain was so cheap and easy these days that on net the balance argued in favor of keeping that requirement. But we could introduce a charter modification that introduces a careful waiver procedure.