| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Pesky Response to Stuart Lynn Proposal
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 17 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
There a lot of people who like ICANN who read this site and hope that ICANN is strengthened by this proposal and becomes an even better organization.
No trolls here.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
One of the good things about ICANNwatch is the diverse opinions of its readers. There are probably as many readers who really like the way ICANN operates as there are readers who fume at the mere mention of VeriSign, etc. Well, maybe. But in any case, not all of those who support ICANN are trolls looking to start flame wars on ICANNwatch. The Lynn Proposal has some good points.
At-Large voting and adding 9 elected board members was just not going to work. The board would have been completely polarized and nothing would get done. Lynn realized this, and has come up with a good plan. Bring on the government reps, this will help the Internet.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
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
|
