[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [IFWP] ICANN Membership/Self selection works best
- To: ICANN Comments <Comments@icann.org>
- Subject: Re: [IFWP] ICANN Membership/Self selection works best
- From: Jeff Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:24:33 +0100
- CC: Andrew McLaughlin <email@example.com>, Icann Membership <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Organization: INEG. Inc. (Spokesman INEGroup)
- References: <19990720041237.VUIL957005.email@example.com> <37945A4B.EDDD6B45@mama-tech.com> <37948250.65CBA482@texoma.net>
Eric and all,
Compleatly agreed. This has been the basic principal that the INEGroup
has supported from the very beginning... It remains so...
Good point, although restated, Erick! >;)
> Diane Cabell wrote:
> > Joop Teernstra wrote:
> > > I agree with Ellen, that there is much merit in the idea of limiting ICANN
> > > membership to the assigned name and number stakeholders.
> > What about corporate holders? Should they be permitted to vote in the at-large?
> Beware of administrative nightmares. Who wants to spend eternity arguing over which
> applicant is a stakeholder and which applied for no reason (not likely, btw)? If
> someone thinks she wants to be a member, that should be enough UNLESS we can apply
> some MECHANICAL criteria, such as requiring an e-mail address (which suits me).
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208