[At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for Telecommunities Canada's ALS application

Tue May 22 16:53:14 EDT 2007

Danny

The AtLarge users that I talk to are livid about the Dominica ccTLD contract
that is due to run until 2011, that charges US$150 for a domain. NOT
registerfly.  Others are interested in getting back the management of their
cctlds from foreign interests. NOT registerfly. I have asked over 200
individual internet users in the Caribbean about the issues that are
important to them and not one said Registerfly. So we represent OUR users.

There are over 1 billion current internet users and the ENTIRE population of
the US is 300 million. There are more internet users than DOUBLE the entire
population of the US who live in countries other than the US. And US issues
are NOT paramount in other regions. I don't see you screaming about IDNs,
but people in e.g. China are desperate for this to move ahead. 

The RALOS in those regions are trying to work on the issues that are
important in their regions. The At Large in North America is UNREPRESENTED
because YOU who are supposed to be their representatives are doing NOTHING
about their issues.

If you want to blame the non-representation of the Registerfly users (who
are almost ALL North American from what I've seen) on the LAC, or AP, or
Africa, keep doing so, but really, it's you guys who are responsible, and
you who are dropping the ball. 

Excuse the tone, but I'm getting really pissed off by some of the posts from
North America , which is the LAST RALO to form and the LAST one that is
holding the At Large back from ending its Interim status and getting going
on its policy work. 

Honestly, if NA doesn't want to do anything - the rest of the regions will
go ahead and work on the issues that our at large users tell us are
important to them, and the North American users will be left twisting in the
wind while the "representatives"  - (who by the way haven't as yet been
voted for by ANY individual user) keep whining about the ALAC not doing
anything for the region's users. 

You have a "rep" now. Why not direct this criticism there?

Jacqueline

-----Original Message-----
From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 3:39 PM
To: nick.ashton-hart at icann.org
Cc: Luc Faubert; At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss
Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for Telecommunities
Canada's ALS application

Nick,

Thank you for these questions.  As my response is
predicated on elements drawn from ICANN's history,
allow me first to direct you to an historical overview
penned by Bret Fausett entitled, "Captured:
The sad, predictable story of ICANN's at-large
membership" at
http://www.ddj.com/dept/architect/184414542

My thoughts:  From day one, the at-large was supposed
to be about individuals that weren't otherwise
represented within ICANN processes (individuals that
would elect half of the ICANN Board so that the
Special Interest elements would be properly balanced
by the Public Interest elements).  

What you and your peers now deem to be the "at-large"
is a far cry from what was envisioned -- frankly, it's
a perversion whose current incarnation neither
represents nor advocates for the "real at-large" that
at this moment is pounding away at ICANN's doors
screaming for relief.  

The construct that you have collectively assembled is
nothing more than a collection of well-meaning civil
society organizations that are just like the other
well-meaning civil society organizations within the
NCUC.  They can pretend to be the at-large, but they
are not.  The real at-large (the mob out there with
the pitchforks at hand) is livid over ICANN's handing
of the Registerfly situation while your RALO
organizations that pretend to be the at-large have
given it narry a thought.

All that has been accomplished in this
four-and-a-half-year-long-ALAC-exercise is splitting
the Civil Society element into two parts while
ensuring that that the individuals pounding at your
doors continue to have no voting rights within any
ICANN deliberative or policy-recommending organ.  

Candidly, it matters little to me whether the RALO
orgs merge with the NCUC orgs.  In my view, neither
set of orgs has done much of anything to protect the
registrant interest.  They're both just flip sides of
the same coin.

--- Nick Ashton-Hart <nick.ashton-hart at icann.org>
wrote:

> Danny, a point on this subject, for my edification
> if it isn't too much trouble.
> 
> When the ICANN Bylaws refer to the NCUC in Article
> X, S5(1)(d), it states:
> 
> e. Non-Commercial Users (representing the full range
> of non-commercial
> entity users of the Internet
> 
> If one looks at the normal meaning of these words, I
> would take from
> it that the NCUC was designed to represent not
> individual Internet
> users, but non-commercial legally-constituted (or
> even not legally
> constituted) ENTITIES in a comprehensive way.
> 
> Of course, this would apply to NGOs, and could apply
> to any NGO, but
> was that the design of this constituency? I gather
> that the original
> idea was that this was for the universities where
> the Internet was
> once managed, and other organisations of that type.
> 
> This is of course not by way of saying that anyone
> should be excluded
> - on the contrary - just that it seems you are
> suggesting that we all
> blur the lines between individual Internet users'
> representatives
> (At-Large) and everyone else non-commercial (NCUC)
> very considerably.
> Is that actually beneficial? If you were to do that,
> then you would
> end up with duplicative structures, surely?
> 
> Or are you actually advocating that the two
> constituencies should be
> merged together?
> 
> I very much hope this does not launch a lot of
> disgruntlement or
> disagreeableness as that's far from the point (and I
> fail to see how
> it would actually bring much benefit) - I'm asking
> genuine questions
> here, not presuming the answers (I don't think).
> 
> On 22/05/07, Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > So why not do the right thing and refer them
> instead
> > to the Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC)?
> >
> >
> > --- Luc Faubert <LFaubert at conceptum.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > Alan,
> > >
> > > Thanks for you thorough reply. I appreciate.
> > >
> > > >From what I understand of the history behind
> the
> > > wording to the effect that orgs certified as
> ALSes
> > > should be user-driven, it was meant as a
> protection
> > > against lobbying groups. It would be a shame if
> this
> > > kept legitimate orgs of orgs out of the process,
> as
> > > these are sometimes the only orgs with the human
> > > resources to invest in the demanding task of
> > > following ICANN-related activites.
> > >
> > > Let's hope ALAC can clear things up before long,
> as
> > > another org of orgs from Canada has applied for
> > > certification (Communautique, an org a bit like
> TC
> > > in French-speaking Québec).
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________
> > > Luc Faubert
> > > Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du
> > > changement /
> > > IT governance and change management consulting
> > > +1 514 236 5129
> > > www.LucFaubert.com
> > > www.LucFaubert.com/blog
> > > www.isoc.qc.ca
> > > www.ccig.ca
> > > www.uqbm.qc.ca
> > > www.maillons.qc.ca
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________
________
> > Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
> > in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
> >
>
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC mailing list
> > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >
>
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >
> > At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org
> > ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> Nick Ashton-Hart
> PO Box 32160
> London N4 2XY
> United Kingdom
> UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011
> USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460
> Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135
> mobile: +44 (7774) 932798
> Win IM: ashtonhart at hotmail.com / AIM/iSight:
> nashtonhart at mac.com /
> Skype: nashtonhart
> Online Bio:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
> 

____________________________________________________________________________
________Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/

_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org
ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 5/21/2007
2:01 PM

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 5/21/2007
2:01 PM