[IFWP] ICANN Membership & Network Democracy

[Ken Freed]

Thank you, Esther, for asking my views on ICANN membership.
Please forgive the length of this reply, but it feels necessary.

The idea that membership should be limited to domain name
holders, quite honestly, offends my democratic sensibilities.
It's the same as restricting sufferage to white male property
owners. Although I "own" two domains, I don't deserve any
more rights than anyone else, or any fewer rights, either.

Generally, I favor opening the process as wide as possble,
opting for inclusion over exclusion. Eventually, I want to see
the entire Internet governed under a global constitution that
ensures direct democracy through "universal sufferage."
In other words, since the Internet will affect everyone on
the planet, to whatever degree, everyone on the planet
is a "stakeholder" with a natural right to have a fair say
in how the network affecting them is being governed.
This is a pivotal concept, and it changes everything.

Speaking practically, though, it makes global sense to move
toward this goal incrementally. In 1999, only a tiny fraction of
the world population is online, yet each of these people needs
a voice in the governance decisions, if only through some kind
of representation. Options here range from including key public
interest groups in ICANN and DNSO, to inviting all ISPs to have
their customers nominate and elect a representative. What will
work best here still needs to be discussed and determined.

This new representative democracy, however, must not be
allowed to become entrenched. Like yourself in your current
role as the interim chair of ICANN, the representatives must
be clear in their hearts and minds that they are only serving
in this capacity on a temporary basis, until a viable system
for direct democracy can be adopted and implemented.

Let me address one other point, a darker issue that goes
to the heart of whether we can sustain network democracy.

Eric Weisberg has suggested the idea of inviting public
interest groups to participate because the mass majority
will never bother to vote on network affairs, even if asked.
The public apathy prompting his comment is a reality, but
I'm convinced this reality will shift as more and more of us
begin to feel empowered by the experience of interacting
instantly and globally. Once any of us truly "gets" the full
scope of our interactivity -- how everything we think, say
and do changes life for everyone, to whatever degree --
we become prone to accept our responsibility for the
consequences of our interactions. As the Interent
encourages this interactive global sensibility, I do
believe we'll see an explosion in the pro-democracy
movement, and we need to plan ahead for this time.

As for the enervating apathy so widespread today,
may I humbly suggest that this stems from people's
feelings of powerlessness, a false belief that their
actions do not make a difference, so why bother?

Perhaps the deeper truth here is that we use our
apathy as a way of avoiding responsibility for how
powerful we really are in our interdependent world.
Again, as more of us evolve a global sense of our
deep interactivity, apathy wiil fade. We will enjoy the
grassroots activism of the most engaged populace
the world has ever known. I find that vision thrilling!

But this better world will not happen automatically,
The foundations must be constructed today, now,
in the way DNS expansion is governned. If we give
way to the exclusively proprietary influences active
daily on these mailing lists, we will regret it, and
our grandchildren will curse our names. But if we
take the long view here, we will be blessed for
generations to come. The choice is ours.

Ken Freed
Media Visions Webzine
http://www.media-visions.com



On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, Esther Dyson wrote:
>We're working on deciding that. What's *your* opinion? How should we
>determine if you're a real individual? (As Jay [Fenello] suggests
>indirectly - and respectfully - below, please see all the history on
>membership at www.icann.org, too!)
>
>Esther
>
>
>At 09:32 AM 10/02/99 -0700, Ken Freed wrote:
>>Would an individual like me, without any
>>financial interest in DNS registrations
>>(beyond wanting URLs to be affordble
>>and fair), be "qualified" to join ICANN
>>and to participate within the DNSO?
>>And would there be any bounds on
>>speaking up, electronically or in person?
>>Is the door truly open to anyone, anyone at all?
>>-- ken



>>At 2/6/99, 02:09 AM, John D. Goodspeed wrote:
>>>I have some questions regarding the ICANN membership selection process. I
>>>would like anyone with detailed knowledge of how the selections for ICANN
>>>membership will be made to please respond either publicly or privately.
>>>
>>>Thank you.
>>>
>>>John D. Goodspeed
>>>
>>>>2.0 MEMBERSHIP
>>>>
>>>>2.1 Membership.
>>>>
>>>>It is expected that ICANN will have individual and corporate and
>>>organizational
>>>>membership. Any ICANN member with expertise or interest in domain name
>>>>issues may join the DNSO General Assembly by submitting a membership
>>>>application.
>>>>
>>>
>>>The root of public trust in the DNSO lies within the makeup of its General
>>>Assembly. In order for me to understand who gets on the DNSO General
>>>Assembly I need to understand how one initially gets to become a member of
>>>ICANN.
>>>
>>>What entity within ICANN will have approval or veto authority over
>>>individual or corporate or organizational membership? Will the ICANN board
>>>or a committee appointed by the board have control over membership?
>>
>>
>>Hi John,
>>
>>As I've replied elsewhere, the membership issue in
>>the Paris Draft is not complete. We had consensus
>>that individuals and corporations/organizations should
>>belong, but we did not have consensus on how to qualify
>>these members. We also agreed that this qualification
>>question was also being addressed in the ICANN MAC,
>>and that we could learn from their consensus.
>>
>>Jay.
>>
>>
>>>>2.2 The General Assembly.
>>>>
>>>>The General Assembly is an open body of individuals and corporations and
>>>>organizations with a knowledge of and an interest in issues pertaining to
>>>>achievement of DNSO objectives, who are willing to contribute time, effort
>>>and
>>>>expertise in DNSO work items, including discussion of work items, work item
>>>>proposal and development, draft document preparation, participation in
>>>working
>>>>groups and steering committees. The General Assembly is an open, consensus
>>>>based assembly, process oriented rather than member oriented. General
>>>>Assembly conference costs shall be covered by an equitable charge on
>>>attendees >and conferences and meetings shall be held online whenever
>>>possible.
>>>>