Re: [IFWP] ICANN Membership

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Esther and all,

  Yes Esther you noted this some time ago as well.  And to date
there is still NO mechanism for members to realistically participate
in any meaningful manner.  Couple this with you less than honest
testimony to the House Subcommittee, and it shows that you
and almost all of the members of the ICANN (Initial?) Interim Board
are NOT fit to serve...

Esther Dyson wrote:

> Thanks. Noted!
>
> Esther
>
> At 01:21 PM 20/07/99 +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> >Ellen Rony wrote:
> >
> >>Economies don't vote.  Individuals do.
> >>
> >>MAC presented ICANN with an unworkable solution--a membership too grand and
> >>vague to be authenticated without great cost.
> >>
> >>ICANN is tasked to administer names and addresses.  Its stakeholders are
> >>those who have names and addresses or provide infrastructure and services
> >>related to same.  In order to have an IP address or register a domain name,
> >>one must have access to computer hardware and connectivity.  Those who can
> >>afford such access most likely can afford a nominal membership fee.  Those
> >>who cannot, probably likewise do not care about these complex, convoluted
> >>technical issues.
> >>
> >>Membership dues, however minimal, provide a form of accountability for
> >>voting purposes. That's a reasonable quid pro quo for participating in the
> >>vote.
> >>
> >>I understand that one problem with collecting a membership fee is that it
> >>will cost more to administer this than will be collected if the fee is low.
> >>OTOH, no membership fee means higher costs of authentication for voting.
> >>By collecting a membership fee, some authentication is built into the
> >>processing of the registration.
> >>
> >>I suggest that MAC reconvene, go back to the virtual drawing boards, focus
> >>on who are the stakeholders of this corporation, not on some great
> >>humanitarian outreach for all mankind, and develop a proposal that ties
> >>voter authentication through membership fees, even if they are nominal or
> >>on a sliding scale.  Otherwise, the current membership recommendations are
> >>as pie-in-the-sky as ICANN's $5.9 million budget.
> >>
> >
> >This was also the concept of my model for NewCo membership.
> >I agree with Ellen, that there is much merit in the idea of limiting ICANN
> >membership to the assigned name and number stakeholders.
> >I suspect this idea will find sympathy in Joe Sims ear too. <g>
> >
> >
> >
> >--Joop Teernstra LL.M.--  , bootstrap  of
> >the Cyberspace Association,
> >the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
> >http://www.idno.org
> >
> >
>
> Esther Dyson                    Always make new mistakes!
> chairman, EDventure Holdings
> interim chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
> edyson@edventure.com
> 1 (212) 924-8800
> 1 (212) 924-0240 fax
> 104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
> New York, NY 10011 USA
> http://www.edventure.com                    http://www.icann.org
>
> High-Tech Forum in Europe:  24 to 26 October 1999, Budapest
> PC Forum: March 12 to 15, 2000, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
> Book:  "Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age"

Regards,

--
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.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208