Hi Kerry,
These are my personal impressions . . .
At 2/5/99, 06:26 AM, Kerry Miller wrote:
>
>Jay,
>
>{ 2.1 Membership.
>{
>{... Any ICANN member with expertise or interest in domain name
>{ issues may join the DNSO General Assembly by submitting a membership
>{ application.
>
>Isnt an 'ICANN member' anyone at all? Will any application be disbarred?
The Paris meeting had a consensus that people
and organizations should be allowed to join the
DNSO. How to define a person or an organization,
and how to prevent ballot stuffing, however, were
topics that had no easy answer.
We realized that the ICANN MAC was dealing with
the same questions, and we felt that we should
defer a proposal until a clear consensus emerge.
>{ 2.2 The General Assembly.
>{
>{ The General Assembly is an open body of individuals and corporations
>{ and organizations [*] who are willing to contribute[*] time, effort
>{ and expertise ...
>
>Youve hit the nail on the head there! Sadly, it will be difficult to
>monitor...
Agreed, see above.
The [*]who are willing to contribute[*] part
was not meant to be a strict requirement, only
something agreed to by the members.
>{ 2.3 The Names Council.
>{
>{ The Names Council is the Steering Committee for the DNSO, elected
> { through the
>{ constituencies from the General Assembly as described below...
>
>{ 3.1 Overview and Purpose.
>{
>{ The Names Council shall facilitate cooperation and consensus on
>{ policies regarding the Domain Names System and related subjects, and,
>{ in accordance with Article VI, Section 3(a)(ii) of the Corporation's
>{ Bylaws, the Names Council shall forward recommendations on such
>{ subjects to the Board of ICANN. The Names Council shall seek input and
>{ review of any proposed recommendations from all Members. The processes
>{ of the Names Council shall be open and transparent and
>{ non-discriminatory.
>
>If proposals originating in the Names Council must be processed by the
>general assembly, is there a definition of how long or what quorum is
>sufficient for consensus?
I don't understand your question,
please restate.
>{ 3.2 Composition. =20
>{
>{ The Names Council shall be selected by means of the following process:
>
>{ a. Members of the General Assembly shall self-organize into
>[*]diverse[*]
>{ constituencies. No member shall be a member of more than one
>{ constituency. The initial constituencies shall be recognized by the
>{ ICANN Board based on the following criteria:
>{
>{ 1. Constituencies other than the constituency representing
>{ registries, shall represent [*]at least 5%[*] of the members of the
>General
>{ Assembly.
>{
>{ 2. Constituencies shall be open to membership without regard to
>geographic
>{ location.
>
>[...]
>{ 4. Constituencies shall not be formed or recognized insofar as they
>are
>{ based on geographic location, religious affiliation, governmental
>{ affiliation, or membership in any particular corporation or
>{ organization.
>
>Can you clarify why there are both items 2 and 4 here?
There was much discussion about constituencies.
How they should be formed, who they could and
could not represent.
Since there can only be approximately 20, some
rules were proposed to keep this process fair,
and to ensure that each constituency was broad
based. Items 2 and 4 were a result of those
discussions.
Hope this helps!?
Jay.
>[...]
>{ b. Each recognized constituency shall select three (3) members to sit
>{ on the Names Council, no two of whom may come from the same region (as
>{ defined in= the ICANN bylaws).
>
>At 5% per, 20 constituencies -> 60 NC members (max), of which a 2/3
>quorum (per section 3.4) is 40. Whew!
>
>
>Anyhow, congratulations to all for your time, effort, and expertise so
>far!
>
>kerry
>
