Bret A. Fausett a �crit:
>
> ICANN's "Domain Name Supporting Organization Formation Concepts"
> Statement contains a provision which reads: "Individual domain name
> holders should be able to participate in constituencies for which they
> qualify."
>
> Depending on the decisions ICANN makes in approving competing
> constituency applications, individual domain name holders may be present
> in *none* of the seven original constituencies. There is at least one
> proposal in each of the seven constituency areas (including, oddly
> enough, the Non-Commercial Domain Name Holder category) that adopts an
> organizations-centric model in which individuals either do not qualify or
> are placed in a minority position.
>
> I had the impression following the Singapore meeting that ICANN had sent
> a clear message that individual domain name holders were important
> stakeholders in this process and should be included in certain of the
> DNSO's constituency activities. I certainly didn't read "...for which
> they qualify" as an invitation to draft exclusive constituency proposals.
> Was I mistaken?
Well, Bret, it remains to be seen which constituency proposals ICANN
accepts: those allowing individuals or those rejecting them. But I
wouldn't hold my breath, if I were you. It seems that what ICANN has
in mind for individuals is the At-Large membership, so UCANN
probably doesn't mind if individuals are squeezed out of the
constituencies. This might not be unreasonable if individuals
actually do comprise the majority of the At-Large membership; but
since the MAC has proposed no membership criteria, who's to say that
the same organizations that control the constituencies won't also
control the At-Large membership, through their individual members?
And especially if there is no proxy- or online voting, since those
same organizations can afford to send their members around the world
to meetings, whereas individuals can't afford it.
So, what is written doesn't mean very much in the end. What matters
is what is actually done. And so far, nothing has been done to allow
individuals to participate, while everything has been done to give
power to corporations.
Don't forget that Joe Sims told Congress, under a sworn oath, that
individuals and organizations would share power in the DNSO. Do you
see Jow Sims creating a mechanism for shared power in the DNSO? Is
anyone forcing him to keep his sworn word? Can we expect any more
from the board?
