>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:49:45 -0500 (EST)
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from [George
Conrades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>
>>From polarisventures.com!gconrades Thu Feb 11 09:49:44 1999
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Received: from ntserver.polarisventures.com([209.21.230.179]) (6003 bytes)
by ns1.vrx.net
> via sendmail with P:esmtp/D:aliases/T:pipe
> (sender: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
> id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:49:43 -0500 (EST)
> (Smail-3.2.0.100 1997-Dec-8 #2 built 1997-Dec-18)
>Received: by ntserver.polarisventures.com with Internet Mail Service
(5.5.2448.0)
> id <1DBN7Q86>; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:50:48 -0500
>Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From: George Conrades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, George Conrades
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: 'Joop Teernstra' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Diane Cabell
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: [Membership] The People's Republic of ICANN?
>Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:50:47 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>rus, I am inclined to think we should move slowly on opening up membership
>in an unlimited way UNTIL we understand how the membership process works
>against a more understood or qualified database of constituents.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Monday, February 08, 1999 2:44 AM
>To: George Conrades
>Cc: 'Joop Teernstra'; Diane Cabell; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Membership] The People's Republic of ICANN?
>
>
>i do not qualify for any of the categories of membership suggested, yet i
>use
>the internet and believe i have a right to participate in democratic
>decision
>making. probably i am in a very small minority of users. why exclude us?
>aren't
>basic end users entitled to have a say in issues effecting how the
>technologies
>we use are governed? admittedly this is somewhat revolutionary, and it
>should be
>as it is clear that other models of governance/regulation that are removed
>from
>popular participation (as the FCC in the US, example) develop eventually to
>serve industry with few crumbs thrown to users, who are nevertheless paying
>for
>the service. in fact, the technical creators historically are removed from
>decisionmaking, ultimately limited to serving industry thru innovation. i
>believe that those of you that have a technical/scientific interest would be
>well advised to encourage inclusion of the masses, as they will probably
>support
>openness and new creativity while business/industry interest usually is:
>control
>in order to maximize profit.
>furthermore how can you turn away from the possibility, even if it is
>REMOTE, of
>encouraging the spread of participatory democracy?
>rus postel
>
>George Conrades wrote:
>
>> Thank you. These are well reasoned thoughts and bolster my initial view. I
>> think we should consider the staging point.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Joop Teernstra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Saturday, February 06, 1999 9:51 PM
>> To: George Conrades; Diane Cabell; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: RE: [Membership] The People's Republic of ICANN?
>>
>> At 19:43 6/02/99 -0500, George Conrades wrote:
>> >Joop, what's your arguement for limiting to Domain name holders? Is it
>> >simplicity or something more? If I am an interested student sharing an
>> email
>> >account am I not qualified to express an at large vote? Why are you so
>> >concerned about enlarging the scope to at least the broad constituency of
>> >Internet users? FYI, I have been a proponent of Domain names only until I
>> >had the input of our International members on the committee.
>> >
>>
>> George, Daniel, Diane and all,
>>
>> The whole idea is to move the discussion to this list. I am very happy
>that
>> you and other MAC members are taking it up.
>>
>> My arguments for an ICANN of Domain Name and Address space holders:
>>
>> 1. It is the easiest way to create a real electoral roll.
>>
>> 2. Low cost and simplicity of administration/verification (a tick-box for
>> an extra contribution at the time of (re)registration.)
>> 3. Real democracy has always progressed in small steps-- I have had much
>> personal experience with systems that profess to give a voice to "the
>> masses" ; it is an easy cloak for populist tyrants.
>> 4. The Net is a very open communication tool. The interested student with
>> the email account can still contribute her idea's freely and convince
>others
>> with good argument. If voting becomes the real issue, then there will be
>> democratic organisations that can represent the disenfranchised. I am
>also
>> proposing that "all users" can be given a voice via petition and
>referendum.
>>
>> 5. I am afraid that ordinary Domain Name Owners will not join, if they
>feel
>> that "it's all a sham anyway"
>> To get enough real members is a major consideration. If the membership
>base
>> is too small, capture looms large.
>>
>> 6. Giving the vote to "all users" pretends to create that "World
>Government"
>> that you would wish to avoid.
>> 7. It is not proper to give a vote to those who have no "skin" in the
>> system. It may go at the expense of those who do.
>> 8. The DNSO can be the vehicle for input from organisations representing
>> email-only users.
>>
>> In the end it boils down to trust , I think. From my other posts on the
>> subject you may see that I am afraid of membership manipulation made easy
>> by using the conventional media (or large cyber corporations like AOL or
>> MSFT) to recruit members selectively.
>>
>> I am not against an unlimited franchise, but i would like to see it come
>> about in stages, as the trust in the ICANN process grows.
>>
>> See my proposed model http://www.democracy.org.nz/model.html
>> <http://www.democracy.org.nz/model.html>
>> Of course I could change my mind, like you did , but I have to hear real
>> convincing argument from the proponents on all those points above.
>>
>> --Joop--
>> http://www.democracy.org.nz/ <http://www.democracy.org.nz/> model.html
>
>
>
>
--
The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "It's all just marketing" +1 (613) 473-1719
Maitland House, Bannockburn, Ontario, CANADA, K0K 1Y0
