>> For reference, ICANN's "DNSO Formation Concepts" is at:
>> http://www.icann.org/dnso-formation.html
>>
>> Links to current constituency drafts are at:
>> http://www.icann.org/dnso/constituency_groups.html
>>
>
>This is am unfortunate but entirely predictable consequence of allowing the
>initial constituencies to "self-organize" - easily the worst Paris Draft
>provision to have found its way into the final DNSO structure. In the
>absence of explicit, non-ambiguous eligibility guidelines, interest groups
>are encouraged to attempt to define constituencies narrowly in order to
>control outcomes. An example of this is the case of the NCDNHC, where one
>prospective organizer is ignoring ICANN's clear mandate for individual
>participation, while the other would redefine "non-commercial" in a way that
>would disenfranchise many legitimate non-commercial organizations.
>
>If the DNSO is to succeed, ICANN must take action to fix the constituency
>formation process, preferably before the Berlin meeting.
I have to agree. There are only three constituencies: technical, legal
and administrative. Anything else in gerrymandering at worst and
a self selected autocracy at best.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Those who give up a little freedom for a little security
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one"
--Thomas Jefferson
