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)

    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    ALSC publishes Final Draft | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 7 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: ALSC publishes Final Draft
    by AlanDavidson (adavidson@cdt.org) on Tuesday August 28 2001, @03:10AM (#2043)
    User #3014 Info | www.cdt.org
    It is quite useful that the At-Large Study Committee released its report well in advance of the Montevideo meeting. At first glance, major features of the report include:
    * Creation of an "ALSO" membership organizaton
    * Reduction in number of At-Large directors from 9 to 6
    * Direct elections for At-Large Directors by members
    * Membership limited to domain name holders
    * Membership fee (unspecified amount, no sliding scale proposed)
    * Six geographical regions for ICANN (Asia split)

    Some elements of the report are quite helpful, including the acknowledgement of ICANN's "public interest" role and the need for individual user participation. The comments on creating a more vital membership organization and endorsing democratic elections are also quite good.

    Other parts of the report will trouble some people. Reducing the number of At-Large Directors to 6 from 9, for example, means that Bylaws revisions (which require 2/3 of the Board to approve) could occur without the consent of those Directors. This had previously been viewed as a bedrock guarantee of some importance.

    Limiting membership to domain name holders raises many questions. Who is a domain name holder? (The report defines "individual domain name holders" in such as way that organizations would appear to be able to vote through their designated contact person.) Will companies with many domains be able to cast many votes? Is this a fair structure for representation of the broader public? Note that DNS holders as a group appear to be largely made up of the very organizations and interests already well-represented in the SOs.

    No doubt this is the beginning of a long discussion. The NGO and Academic ICANN Study (http://www.naisproject.org/), of which I am a part, will be releasing its Final Report on Friday. That report will take a slightly different approach. We look forward to comments as well.

    - Alan Davidson
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The @Large is OURS, Hands Off!
    by Anonymous on Tuesday August 28 2001, @03:31AM (#2044)
    The @Large is OURS,Hands Off

    It's illegitimate and is to be rejected.

    A promise was made and the promise must be kept.

    The @large membership has every right to 50% of the board seats and anything less is unacceptable

    The @large membership will not be "TOLD" what it can and cannot have by self-dealing ICANNocrats

    People it's time to wake up!,The ICANNocRATS are responsible for making the @Large become truly "@Large" but if you the @Large members don't act you will share in that responsibility.

    Don't sit around asking for their acceptance. The 50% @Large promise must be enforced and respected. NO negotiation

    Just say No to corruption and rip the @Large away from them NOW!






    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: ALSC publishes Final Draft
    by Anonymous on Tuesday August 28 2001, @03:45AM (#2045)
    This lame proposal has the distinct odor of an Esther Dyson scheme. She's so full of herself ...
    God knows why she stays involved with ICANN and the DNS. Remember, she is hugely responsible for the current debacle with .INFO. She loved Afilias, but verbally trashed IOD's business model, back in November 2000. As it turns out, Afilias can't even run their own registry.

    Dyson is one of those indviduals who was born on third base, but trying to convince everybody she hit a triple to get there.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: ALSC publishes Final Draft
    by Anonymous on Tuesday August 28 2001, @07:40PM (#2047)
    By the logic of the report the DNSO constituencies for Intellectual Property, ISPs, Business and Commercial, and Non-Commercial would have to be disbanded because they are neither providers nor implementors of DNS services and thus must be folded in with the rest of the "users".
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: ALSC publishes Final Draft
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Friday August 31 2001, @09:41AM (#2083)
    User #2810 Info
    Karl Auerbach has some things to say.

    I fail to see how an @large of 6 will be an improvement on 5. The 5 existing BoD members don't vote as a bloc, how would having one more seat make a difference? Even 9 seats might not make much difference. The entities now (often wrongly) in control of ICANN can and do often vote as a bloc when looking out for their self interests. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]

    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