Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> >I believe one of the reasons we are in Year 2 of ICANN without an At
Large
> >membership is because that membership was defined too broadly. That
>
> You mean you don't think I should be able to walk across the street
> to the Bannockburn general store and tell old Harry that he's a voting
> member of internet government?
>
> Limit it it to nameserver owners. That's who it's supposed to be
> coordinating isn't it? (Like they ever asked to be coordinated).
Provided that 'Old Harry' and his children will never be impacted in any way
whatsoever by the Internet, I would then and only then emphatically agree
that they should not have an avenue for their voices to be heard within the
halls of Internet Governance.
Nobody wants to be coordinated. But that is exactly what government does.
Whether her mandate is narrow or broad THE ICANN WILL COORDINATE ALL OF US,
not just those of us who own nameServers. We all ought to get in on the
voting. Even Harry.
Arnold Gehring
>
>
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> - Mark Crispin
>
>
>
