at-large "membership" and indivdual domain name holders constituency

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

There is an obvious overlap between the at-large "membership" and 
the proposed Individual Domain Name Holders Constituency.  The claim 
has been that IDNHC members would have a defined special interest, 
different from the at-large.  However, I don't think that 
distinction holds, under closer examination.

First of all, it is clear that *all* the members of the IDNHC would be 
eligible for membership in the at-large, and indeed, we can expect 
that most of them will be.

Second, in fact registration of a domain name is not a significant
qualification for membership -- anyone can have a domain by spending
a few minutes at a web site and paying $35/year (probably
significantly less).  That is, the IDNHC can be thought of as a
membership organization with a $35/year membership fee, with a
relatively trivial membership ritual you have to go through.  Any
member of the at-large can be a member of the IDNHC.

Thus, those members of the at-large interested in incrementally 
increasing their representation can also participate in the IDNHC; 
while the IDNHC will almost certainly be a large subset of the 
at-large. 

Whether this overlap is a good or bad thing can be debated, but 
there is little doubt that it would exist.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain