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

Re: Individual Memberships (was Re: [Membership] The People'sRepublic of ICANN?

Dr Nii Quaynor wrote:

> Daniel:
> Actually, its the same as Kents so I wonder why you are shying away from it.
> If the CEO is voting on behalf of the organization but therefore *cant* vote
> again as himself its as though the organization had no vote.  Why would a
> CEO want to give up his personal vote for a corporations vote? Why not have
> the individual vote as he wishes and rather keep the organization out? The
> companies are going to be there anyway simply from the membership of their
> officers so their interests are represented. The formal presence of the
> company is only for their benefit of association with ICANN which might have
> some promotional priviledges.
> How are you going to enforce all this? I voted as individual or I voted as
> corporation? Just too complex for me!
> The simplest is that *only* individuals vote.

I've missed something here.  Pat me kindly on the head and fill me in.  If
membership is limited to domain holders/IP address holders, how is the
indivdual/corporation distinction relevant?  Was there a suggestion in that case
that only those domains that are owned by individuals would have voting status?
That doesn't seem reasonable to me. In that case, a one-entity-one-vote seems
reasonable and, whether the entity is an individual or a corporation, an
individual will still be casting the vote.

If, instead, a one-vote per domain or one-vote per employee structure is being
suggested, will AOL get to vote all 1.2+ million of its L2 domains separately?
If AOL owns and pays for (I'm guessing here) say 1/10 of all SLDs on the Net,
shouldn't it have greater standing than I do with only one and only domain?  Who
speaks for the user who is actually footing (much of) the bill for AOL's
domains?  Does IBM get one vote per employee *and* one vote per domain? I surely
hope not.

Diane Cabell