Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)

    Membership Issues ICANN Explores Killing At-Large Elections
    posted by michael on Friday February 22 2002, @05:46PM

    After two years of ICANN doing everything it possibly could to get the tens of thousands of people who registered to become ICANN members to lose interest and go away, ICANN's hand-picked and one-sided At-Large Study Commission (ALSC) today unveiled a contingency plan to maybe have (stunted) elections for 6 of the 9 at large seats (3 vanish). Or maybe not, in which case ICANN would appoint at-large directors itself, Board Squatter-style.

    The cyber-federalist #10 offers a good history of the origins of the at-large membership so I won't repeat it here. But the highlights of ICANN's unrelenting campaign to make the at-large go away do bear repeating.
    • ICANN insiders fought the idea of an elected at-large every step of the way, right from the time that the US Dept. of Commerce forced them to agree to it as a condition of recognition. Representation, Joe Sims argued, was itself a source of instability.
    • ICANN, either on purpose or through the incompetence of the person just hired to be its Technical Systems Manger, managed to create a registration system in which a very large number of people who wanted to register were unable to do so.
    • ICANN then took the 143,806 survivors of the initial registration gauntlet and began to whittle them down via its authentication process.
    • Nevertheless 76,183 people, about half, managed to get registered and to log in at least once to validate their status.
    • ICANN impaneled a nominating committee to limit the number of insurgent candidates. As the NAIS report put it "the Committee was basically unaccountable for its decisions and opaque in its process, raising critical questions about the Board-nomination process as a whole". Only a small number of member-nominated write in candidates were allowed. Nevertheless, in both Europe and North America, those candidates beat ICANN's candidates. In Asia, the region with the largest level of registration, the ICANN-nominated candidate won handily. There were so few voters in Africa and Latin America as to call to mind the rotten borough.
    • 34,035 voted.
    • After the election, ICANN froze the members site to make communication among members much more difficult.
    • ICANN made no effort to enable communication between the elected at-large Board members and their constituents.
    • Shortly after the at-large election, ICANN told its new members that, sorry, they were not members after all!

    It's thus just staggering to read in the latest ALSC report "that there should not be At-Large representation (or that At-Large representation would not be effective or meaningful) without the sustained individual participation that an ALSO [At-Large Supporting Organization] would provide."

    ICANN did allow the ALSC to send one message earlier this year to all the initial 143,789 would-be-members. An amazing 5985 opted in despite all the treatment they'd received, but only 1435 completed the ALSC's membership survey. Of these, the real stalwart, run-the-gauntlet types, only two thirds said they would be very likely to register if there was a membership fee.

    In short, there was a substantial membership, ICANN turned it off, refused to let anyone communicate with it by email including the people elected to represent it. Now, once bitten, even the most stalwart are twice shy.

    But wait, the ALSC feels lonely too: "The level of interest in a self-sustaining membership has not been demonstrated and factors such as the low level of user involvement in the ALSC's work do raise concern." Um, sorry, but once ICANN appointed a body combined of neutrals and people with a track record of opposing an elected at-large, but lacking a single person with a track record of supporting an elected at-large, what was the point? It was not a body destined to give advocates of open, widespread, unconditional, democratic representation a fair hearing...and this latest report fully bears that out. Rig the game, then damn your opponents for not playing.

    Anyway, now that its time to have a new election, the ALSC suggests that unless enough people come forward and pay membership dues (to be non-members!) the dearth of individual participation is a reason for ICANN to consider not having elections and just appoint the at-large???

    If it adopts this innocent-of-history logic, ICANN would be like the protagonist in the classic definition of chutzpah, the old tale of the child who murders his parents and then says he deserves mercy because he is an orphan.

    The hell of it is, there really is a good case for not having at-large elections, but you won't see hide nor hair of it in the ALSC report. As the ALSC notes, elections are expensive, hard to do well, and particularly difficult if you have no idea who the electorate is or should be. But the answer is not simply to dump elections, or replace elected directors with new Board Squatters or some other species of political zombie. The answer is to admit that if elections are impossible, so too is an ICANN that engages in social regulation. ICANN needs to be reformulated, not just to slow the mission creep, but to reverse it. Despite the recent trial balloons coming out of Brussels and Washington, don't hold your breath. The ALSC report looks a lot more like the real thing.

    Charming, really charming.

      ICANNWatch Login  


    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

      Related Links  
  • ICANNWatch.org
  • good history of the origins of the at-large membership
  • argued
  • the person just hired to be its Technical Systems Manger
  • authentication process
  • "the Committee was basically unaccountable for its decisions and opaque in its process, raising critical questions about the Board-nomination process as a whole"
  • members site
  • not members
  • 1435 completed
  • a body combined of neutrals and people with a track record of opposing an elected at-large, but lacking a single person with a track record of supporting an elected at-large
  • Brussels
  • Washington
  • hand-picked and one-sided
  • At-Large Study Commission
  • plan
  • Board Squatter
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    ICANN Explores Killing At-Large Elections | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 4 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: ICANN Explores Killing At-Large Elections
    by joannalane on Saturday February 23 2002, @05:03PM (#5027)
    User #2769 Info
    It's unlike you to miss some key points. Look at the evidence from the DoC point of view. In the absence of tangible efforts at self-formation of the At Large, (meaning proper public representation in the ICANN process), and in the absence of worldwide cooperation, (meaning agreement with the CCs), the MoU will not be renewed in September, resulting in a US government take over and formation of a successor agency in association with the present GAC. In short, ICANN is on the point of collapse.

    One option open to the Board is to resign en masse voluntarily and ask the DoC to take over. It is a very real possibility. If you think that accounts of Joe Sims recent travelogue and the Board EGM taking place in Washington this weekend are not indicative of desperate measures, then you are very much mistaken. The climate has changed.

    The question that we all need to answer for ourselves is this; Do we trust government to represent the public interest in the ICANN process in place of an At Large?

    If your answer is yes, then sit back, do nothing and watch the take over in action. If your answer is no, then the best chance for the At large is to pledge your support to the new ALSC initiative being forged by Pindar Wong on the At Large forum list, then pray that the Board will endorse the At Large elections.

    The middle ground, which is for the Board to appoint At Large Directors without an election, will not fly. The DoC wants proper representation of the public interest, not a band aid.

    Perhaps it easier for those of us that have not been in the battle trenches from the very beginning to fully appreciate the fresh opportunities that are now emerging for new leaders, but allow me to thank you for helping to bring this about. It could not have happened without you. You will not be forgotten, whatever happens next.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:

    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com