[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Membership] MAC reports and models-New URLs

The consensus is that the At Large membership should extend beyond the category
of domain holders.  There are many individuals and organizations that are
impacted by names and numbers policies (and the implementation of protocols) who
do not have domain names.  Personnel who work in the Internet industry, mail
users, people who have websites on hosted domains, etc.

Although a limited membership as you propose has not been ruled out, there does
not seem to be much support on the MAC for it at the present time.  You are
absolutely right, however, that it would be much easier to administer.

Diane Cabell

a@help.org wrote:

> I notice there is no model based on membership as part of domain
> registration where a 'tax' is added to the registration fee.  Is this model
> under consideration?  It seems to me that this would present the most source
> of funding for ICANN since the income could be predicted with much more
> accuracy.  Plus, since verification would only depend on domain registration
> this would reduce the burden on ICANN for this.  Of course, the percentage
> of participation would be small.
> Russ smith
> http://consumer.net
> >We are beginning to consolidate the various streams of consciousness on
> >At-Large membership
> >These are all works in progress, so please continue to send your
> comments to membership@icann.org
> Crew's membership models are at
> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rcs/models.html
> Cabell's report on voting is at
> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rcs/report.html
> Diane Cabell

Diane Cabell

Fausett, Gaeta & Lund, LLP
Boston, MA