Re: [Membership] The real reason language is not the issue

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Mon, Feb 15, 1999 at 11:56:50PM -0600, Eric Weisberg wrote:
> 
> 
> Esther Dyson wrote:
> > 
> > Other comments, especially from those non-native-English speakers (who of
> > course are not the non-ENglish speakers who are not on this list)?
> 
> The question is whether the IFWP (list, attendees at meetings and
> anyone else who cares to join) should form the nucleus of ICANN's
> membership (a "jump start"),

Has anyone seriously suggested this?  That would be completely nuts.  
The IFWP is not an organization; there is no coherent list of 
members; some of the entities on the mailing list are clearly 
fabrications.

I consider legal existence, either as a natural person or as a
legally sanctioned entity such as a corporation, as an absolutely
basic requirement for membership.  There are issues of enforcement
and verification that must be resolved, but the basic principle seems
to me essential.

Moreover, there is no need for a "jump-start" as you seem to mean. 
It should be clear that a substantial time must elapse between the
opening of membership and the first election -- on the order of 6
months, at least. 

As well, there needs to be a defined transition process -- there are
verification mechanisms that need to be established; the empty
Article II of the bylaws needs to be drafted; people must be selected
to operate the initial verification (these people are probably *not*
the initial members); voting mechanisms need to be established, etc
etc etc. 

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