Actually, Evan, the Noncommercial Users Constituency does represent ALL users within the GNSO. Ownership of a domain name is NOT a prerequisite for NCUC membership. Per the NCUC Bylaws, section 111(h)(11) NCUC membership is open to:

ii) An Individual Internet user who is primarily concerned with the public-interest aspects of domain name policy, and is not represented in ICANN through membership in another Supporting Organization or GNSO Stakeholder Group;

Domain name ownership, again, is not required, contrary to your assertion. Hope this clarifies things a bit.

Sent from my iPhone

-----Original Message-----
From: Evan Leibovitch <evan
> Consider the NCUC, which by its very name is intended to represent
> "users"
> within the GNSO. Ownership of at least one domain name is a
> pre-requisite
> of NCUC membership. So what constituency (that is, a full voting GNSO
> component, as opposed to a non-voting advisory body) represents
> non-domain-owning Internet "users".
>
>
> > However you could also consider public  in this context to be all the
> > people of the world.   Even people that don't directly use the
> Internet as
> > a communication mechanism are probably affected by it in some way.
> >
>
> ​Indeed. But what say have they traditionally had within ICANN?
>
> Of course, there is the ALAC, which has a Bylaw mandate to speak for
> end
> users. But, the gap between speaking and being listened to has been,
> while
> slowly closing, still rather wide.
>
> I don't have to go far into the world to see a perception of ICANN as a
> compact between domain sellers and domain buyers that considers only
> their
> interests, with general indifference to consequences beyond those two
> groups. There has never, in the time I have been involved as a
> volunteer
> here, been any core conversation about the ethics of enabling
> dictionary
> words to be commoditized in a manner that goes well outside the bounds
> of
> trademark treaty. Other non-debated core values have not only led to
> the
> maximization of duplicate and defensive domains, but now seem to depend
> upon them for some participants' business models; these fundamental
> choices
> clearly did not consider -- and certainly did not engage -- the broader
> world.
>
>
> > Its primary feedback mechanism for determining the global public
> interest
> > is the "ICANN community" described above.
> >
>
> ​That's the theory.​
>
>
> ​The ongoing (and recently escalating) friction between the ICANN
> board and
> its two "global public interest" Advisory Boards​ indicates that this
> mechanism is not as effective as it should be.

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community