Jay Fenello wrote:
> (....)
> My question was really the opposite --
> is there anyone who feels that there
> should *not* be a public interest
> constituency?
>
> If so, why?
>
> Jay.
>
I haven't been following the DNSO details of late; forgive me if you've
already covered these points.
Do you think that the ICANN At Large membership will be sufficient to
serve this purpose? Wasn't that the reason for setting it up and giving
it equal weight on the Board?
If DNSO has an "at large" constituency as well as ICANN, will that divide
the at-large pie unnecessarily (if fees are required)? If membership is
free so that everyone could join both would that give them a double vote?
Or does "public interest constituency" mean representatives from public
interest organizations (such as EFF, ACLU, whatever)?
Diane Cabell
MAC
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
