>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 06:45:55 -0400 (EDT)
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from ["Dr Nii Quaynor"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>
>>From ghana.com!quaynor Mon Apr 12 06:45:53 1999
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Received: from austin.gh.com([196.3.64.1]) (8957 bytes) by ns1.vrx.net
> via sendmail with P:esmtp/D:aliases/T:pipe
> (sender: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
> id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 06:45:33 -0400 (EDT)
> (Smail-3.2.0.100 1997-Dec-8 #2 built 1997-Dec-18)
>Received: from sasabonsam.gh.com (sasabonsam.gh.com [196.3.64.23])
> by austin.gh.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA00571;
> Mon, 12 Apr 1999 10:32:18 GMT
>From: "Dr Nii Quaynor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Michael Sondow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "ICANN MAC list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "ICANN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Int'l Forum on the White Paper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joop Teernstra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Jonathan Zittrain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Daniel Kaplan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "DNSO discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Einar Stefferud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Eric Weisberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Esther Dyson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Jay Fenello" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Karl Auerbach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Kathryn Kleiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Larry Lessig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Milton Mueller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [Membership] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18
>Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 11:01:36 -0000
>Message-ID: <01be84d3$d51bfe20$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
>
>
>
>Some inputs for your consideration.
>
>>
>>1. Any individual or organisation may be an AL member. Only
>>ORGANISATIONS that are members of a SO are excluded.
>>
>>Comment: No criteria whatsoever for membership is a clear invitation
>>to persons with no real interest in the Internet, but who seek to
>>use a newly created organization to further their political
>>ambitions, to join and manipulate their standing as members for
>>their own purposes. As Joop Teernstra has so well pointed out in his
>>proposal, an Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>>clearly has a primary if not unique responsibility towards those who
>>possess or make use of Internet names and numbers, and it is these
>>who should be its members. As to excluding from the At-Large
>>membership organizations that are members of the SOs, that is not
>>only impossible to control, since organizations are after all only
>>collectives of their individual members, but undesirable since the
>>organizations that belong to the SOs, as well as the individuals who
>>are members of them, need a forum for collective deliberation, and
>>that, by all reason, should be the At-Large membership.
>>
>
>MAC deliberations at Singapore made recommendations on criteria. I recall
>that the criteria *did not* exclude people with criminal record because of
>potential problems of dissidents, for example. Hence its not true that no
>criteria were specified. This meeting was an open meeting, as I recall.
>
>I support the statement that those who possess or make use of Internet names
>and numbers should be members. I however think that there are others who get
>impacted by the Internet and should not be excluded. Several of these users
>dont own names and *dont* know that numbers even exist. Hence a more
>flexible and open membership should be sought beyond what you are calling
>for.
>
>>2. Members must apply by sending an on-line registration form
>>provided by ICANN, giving an e-mail address and other minimal
>>identification details, which ICANN will only attempt to verify if a
>>complaint is lodged.
>>
>>This is merely a convenience for the ICANN Board; but, like the
>>recommendation above, it invites the worst abuses. Who is to know if
>>the persons applying even exist, or if any of their information is
>>correct? Surely, minimal authentication, easily provided by postal
>>service mail-back, must be required in order to substantiate the
>>existence of the applicants.
>>
>
>MAC had discussed a more elaborate procedure involving snail mail. I
>believe its still being discussed so you may be jumping to conclusions on
>this one.
>
>>3. Members must re-register annually. Changes to registered
>>details, particularly e-mail address, must be advised on pain of
>>loss of membership.
>>
>>What is the point to this if there is no hard-copy authentication of
>>members' existence? It only invites further abuses, such as the
>>creation of unlimited false identities on a regular basis, or in the
>>event of an important vote.
>>
>
>A hard-copy authentication procedure has been discussed.
>
>>4. There will be no membership fee. (We consider this to be too
>>difficult to set equitably, and costly to collect.
>>
>>This is preposterous on the face of it. No membership fee to belong
>>to, and vote for the directors of, the international organization
>>controlling the technological and sociological development of the
>>Internet, the most economically and socially potent tool for
>>communication yet invented by man? Why? So that the present Board
>>need not go to the trouble of thinking of a way of collecting dues,
>>something that is accomplished by every other organization without
>>great difficulty? And with what consequences? That persons may join
>>and vote, not only without having to substantiate their identity but
>>without being asked to make any a priori personal contribution
>>whatsoever? And how is ICANN to support itself? Through the funding
>>of special-interest groups, invariably those with the biggest
>>purses, and who will manipulate and control ICANN in proportion to
>>the amount of financial responsibility they provide for its
>>functioning? Is this what is meant by responsibility and
>>responsiveness to the community, as expressed in the White Paper and
>>ICANN's own bylaws?
>>
>
>Several Developing Country constituencies cannot pay the dues. We prefer not
>to exclude anyone because of dues. We also want every one to join through
>the front door *not* via some special back-door aid. The rich should not
>dominate this membership group. We will like to avoid second-class citizens
>in this membership.
>
>
>>6. Members form a single world wide constituency to elect AL
>>directors.
>>
>>A nice sentiment. However, it remains to be seen if it has any
>>inherent significance, in light of the other, more pragmatic,
>>measures that may make its realization impossible.
>>
>
>This is meant to be a significant statement, I think.
>
>>9. There is no limit to the number of candidates at any election.
>>
>>Shall all members be candidates, then? And voters as well? Every
>>person in the world, regardless of their character, relation to the
>>Internet, or willingness and ability to participate conscientiously
>>in its functioning, may be both a member of ICANN and a candidate to
>>its board of directors? This is to turn democracy on its head. As
>>always in such undefined situations, those who wish to control and
>>manipulate will find it easy to do so, since there will be no
>>structure impeding them from imposing their own. He who organizes
>>controls, as is well known.
>>
>
>Once again, I recall a criteria has been spelled out at one point in
>Singapore. But then again, we should avoid any effort to *filter* candidates
>since that itself biases the outcome.
>
>>10. We see no need for a nomination committee, or for an electoral
>>committee. These are tasks for the ICANN executive.
>>
>>And who is this executive? Is it not persons who must be empowered
>>by the membership, which at first is not yet formed? In the chaotic
>>and anarchic membership situation created by the foregoing
>>principles, any two or more persons masquerading as the interim
>>executive will have no trouble at all in manipulating the
>>candidature and election of the At-large directors. There must be
>>committees; as many as there are tasks to be performed; in order
>>that the power to control events be distributed and therefore
>>limited. The constant pretence that organization can be avoided will
>>per force result in an undesirable organization. Just as nature
>>abhors a vacuum, so human organizations abhor undefined
>>responsibilities, which are invariably assumed by those interested
>>in using the power that comes with them for their own ends.
>>
>>Our comments end here at the last recommendation. As stated earlier,
>>the comments given here are poor because their subject is poor. We
>>remain amazed that such poverty of thought could result from such
>>richness of initiative on the part of so many. And again, we say
>>that those who have reduced the rich suggestions offered in good
>>faith by the potential members of ICANN to such poor recommendations
>>stand aside to let those willing and able to provide ICANN with a
>>better foundation for its future take their place.
>>
>
>There are always varied perspectives. A lesson may be not to pre-judge
>quickly and not to think that everyoneelse is wrong. These perspectives
>have merit and need to be studied in their contexts.
>
>These are my personal views.
>
>Nii
>
>
>
--
[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
