[Membership] dues, voting and capture

["David J. Steele" <david@fibertron.com>]

At 09:34 PM 4/12/99 +0800, Izumi AIZU wrote:

>I think we have to understand the other side of the world, not only where we
>live and work,  if ICANN really wants to be a 'global' entity.

>The other side of the coin is:
>Dues will separat out those who are serious and have more money to influence
>the process from those who are equally serious but have less money.

Your premise assumes that the dues charged will inhibit participation.  That
need not be the case. Dues clearly need to be set so as to encourage
participation - but discourage fraud.  Such a balance can be met simply by
examining several financial factors for each country/region, and balancing
the competing interests.

If the dues for Americans, for example, is $1.00 USD, then it is possible
that a wealthy American will register 10,000 times to have a
disproportionate impact.  However, if the fee is $100 some Americans will be
discouraged from participating at all.  Accordingly, the dues for Americans
should be set somewhere between these two values.

Now, as for the nation of XYZ, a similar evaluation can be made, balancing
the several factors, and determining an appropriate amount.  If the cost is
too low, then it is possible that wealthy XYZ citizen will register 10,000
times to have a disproportionate effect.  However, if the fee is too high,
poor XYZ citizens will be discouraged from participation.  This method is
independent of which country/region is from.  There should be no objection
to restricting members such as they may only pay the dues for their
appropriate region.

As you can see, this problem isn't because of a conflict between rich and
poor nations/regions, rather, it is between the rich and poor of each
nation/region.

This issue is not about one set of participants being more able or less
able, nor is it about the income/cost of living of sets of participants.
This issues is about keeping the small set of individuals who will attempt
to fraudulently vote from destroying the membership.

>$10, or $20 sounds very nominal for these people who are making 100 times 
>more a day, but please look at some basic facts of GDP per capita table, 
>and quite a few people who are involved with Internet development in these 
>development countries are oftne not making much more than these average
>figures.

Then those values are not appropriate for setting dues. Can you recommend a
different table that may be more appropriate - certainly one exists.

>How to prevent capture by rich and haves is eqally important.

If there are no dues, then capture by the poor is equally possible as by the
rich. We are trying to prevent capture by all - without regard to rich or
poor, African or Asian or American.

>Or, do you really really think that dues is by far that important? I think we
>have other more important (and often conflicting) issues.

This issues isn't about dues, it is about voting, voter fraud, and capture
of power. Clearly such concepts resonate world-wide.

djs