On 30 November 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Esther Dyson) wrote:
>In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
>people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
>voting about.
Until ICANN constructs, enforces, and abides by a coherent, self-consistent
set of policies and procedures for its operation, it will be impossible to
find anyone meeting those criteria.
Besides, if you're going to limit it to "informed voters" then you're
in essence cancelling the vote. Par for the ICANN course is not only one
hand's lack of knowledge about the other hand's actions, but about its
very existence as well.
Are you planning on implementing literacy tests and poll taxes to ensure
only those who are interested and informed vote? The USA has been through
this particular aspect of democracy before, Esther. Jim Crow laws were
declared unconstitutional years ago.
Or perhaps you'd like to predate suffrage and ensure that only landowners
have a vote.
...oh, wait. Except for the literacy tests, you've already implemented
all of this within ICANN.
Tsk.
--
Mark C. Langston
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems Admin
San Jose, CA
