Re: [IFWP] IDNO letter - Questions deserve and answer...[Attention Esther Dyson]

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

Professor Froomkin and all,

  Excellent questions here Professor, and ones that deserve a direct
and definitive answers.  How about it Esther?

Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:

> Might one ask who made this agenda-setting decision, and when?
>
> On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, Esther Dyson wrote:
>
> > Dear Joop and colleagues -
> >
> > I'm writing to respond personally to your proposal for an Individual Domain
> > Name Holders' Constituency.  As you know, the Initial Board decided not to
> > consider it in Berlin because it was not among the seven constituencies we
> > hoped to see form to constitute the full DNSO.  At this point, we are still
> > hoping to approve conditionally the last of the seven original
> > constituencies, and allow the process of enlarging the board to move forward.
> >
> > That means that the Initial Board won't be considering your petition this
> > time either, since we're still working on the first seven.
> >
>
> Was this decided at the recent telephone conference?  Before? After? By
> the Board, or the staff?
>
> > Let me say personally that I  am not totally comfortable  with this
> > decision.  Given that the At-Large Membership is not yet constituted, I
> > think it important that individuals' concerns have some representation
> > within the DNSO.
> >
> > However, there are two other points worth noting.
> >
> > First is that the representativeness of the IDNO is still questionable; it
> > faces many of the same challenges of outreach and breadth that the ICANN
> > Initial Board faces in trying constitute its At-Large membership.  Creating
> > the IDNO now may be a way of avoiding rather than solving this problem.
>
> Please don't misunderstand: I'm not expressing an opinion on the validity
> or otherwise of the IDNO.  But I am curious as to why and especially how
> it doesn't even get a hearing.
>
> > Second, I am more concerned that the voices and interests of individuals be
> > *represented* in the work of the DNSO, than with precisely how that happens.
>
> As a sort-of veteran of Working Group A, and as an individual who sought,
> seemingly in vain, to be officially included in it, I am not in the least
> optimistic about this at this moment...
>
> > Although the process is certainly messy, the concerns of individuals and
> > individuals' rights are now being heard within the DNSO working groups -
> > although perhaps not as effectively as they should be.  Making sure that
> > that process works is where I think we should be focusing our attention
> > right now.
> >
>
> In order to decide if "the process works" it would be most helpful to have
> a fuller understanding of the "process" that produced this outcome.
>
> --
> A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
> U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> +1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
>                  -->   It's hot and humid here.   <--

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