>From one "one person" organization to another....how sweet!
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:23:52 +0100, Jeff Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>All,
>
> Michael, I would not give Mr. Walsh's comments much mind given his
>world renound disgusting behavior that we have all tolorated fo so long
>and realize that his apparent mental illness in progressing with each
>post that he spews forth of late.
>
> As your orginization has every right and should continue to make it's
>voice known we [INEGroup] and I welcome your orginizations thoughts...
>
>William X. Walsh wrote:
>
>> Your subject is offensive.
>>
>> It should read Michael Sondow's comments. The ICIIU is not a
>> Congress, and indeed has no voice. To use an organizational name for
>> the sole purpose of trying to give your comments more weight is no
>> better than our favorite Kook.
>>
>> Consider doing the responsible thing and resubmitting these comments
>> as those of an individual. You might get less opposition.
>>
>> On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 09:43:08 -0400, Michael Sondow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Comments on the Recommendations of the Membership Advisory Committee
>> >of 26 April 1999 (http://cyber.harvard.edu/rcs/alp-comment.htm)
>> >
>> >Principles of the At-large Membership
>> >
>> >2. At-large membership is open to both individuals and
>> >organizations, however, no organization that has a right to
>> >designate or otherwise directly vote for an SO Director may register
>> >as an at-large Member. �Organization� shmean any institution
>> >officially recognized as a legal persona under the laws of the
>> >nation where it claims legal residence. Individuals who are members
>> >of the SOs or their constituencies are welcome to join the
>> >at-largemembership. The most feasible protection against capture by
>> >interests that are not representative of the the user
>> >community at large is to enroll as many Members as possible.
>> >
>> >Comment: Where does this leave the ICIIU? We are signing people up
>> >for the Non-Commercial Domain Name Holders constituency of the DNSO,
>> >since we believe that at least some Internet-related non-profit
>> >organizations represent users and therefore should have a voice in
>> >that constituency; but at the same time it would seem that our place
>> >is in the At-Large membership, by this definition of it. How do we
>> >resolve this problem? Should we drop out of the NCDNHC, and wait to
>> >become part of the At-Large membership? Wouldn't it be a mistake to
>> >leave the DNSO entirely in the hands of organizations, and
>> >commercial ones at that? At the same time, isn't it wrong for a
>> >strictly independent user-oriented entity like the ICIIU not to be
>> >involved in the At-Large membership? How can we solve this?
>> >
>> >3. It is not recommended that membership fees be assessed at this
>> >time. If membership fees should be assessed in the future, they
>> >shall reflect the economic differences of the various geographic
>> >regions.
>> >
>> >Comment: As in our commentary to the previously posted M.A.C.
>> >recommendations, we believe it is a mistake not to charge membership
>> >fees as this will make it virtually impossible to define the
>> >membership or deal with it administratively, and we strongly feel
>> >that an individual who does not make at least a token financial
>> >commitment to the organization will not take membership responsibly.
>> >
>> >9. At-large voting shall be on the principle of
>> >one-person-one-vote. An organization shall be limited to casting
>> >one vote on behalf of the entire organization. Individuals who vote
>> >for SO Directors in their capacity as representatives of SO-member
>> >organizations shall also have a right to vote for at-large Directors
>> >in their personal capacity as at-large Members.
>> >
>> >Comment: This is, in our opinion, an unworkable method of voting. It
>> >will permit the election of At-Large directors who have won only a
>> >very small percentage of the votes (a candidate could be elected
>> >with, say, five votes if all others have only four or less, in a
>> >membership of hundreds), and it paves the way for ballot-box
>> >stuffing by large organizations or companies who send their members
>> >or employees to the At-Large membership only for taking part in the
>> >voting (which is also favored by the lack of membership dues).
>> >Although these provisions of the M.A.C. may be motivated by popular
>> >and democratic ideals, we believe they will in practice have the
>> >opposite effect from the one they were designed to accomplish.
>> >
>> >============================================================
>> >International Congress of Independent Internet Users (ICIIU)
>> > http://www.iciiu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >============================================================
>>
>> --
>> William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> General Manager, DSo Internet Services
>>
>> NSI & Internic news http://www.dso.net/internic/
>
>Regards,
--
William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
NSI & Internic news http://www.dso.net/internic/
