Thanks for your input Ross. I'm from the school of thought that supports the one-man-one-vote principle (which in ICANN terms would equate to one-constituency-one vote). --- Ross Rader <ross@tucows.com> wrote:
Wendy Seltzer wrote:
What a farce.
Whether or not the document is any good
It isn't. It completely marginalizes the individual registrant and user communities by shifting most of the power to the commercial user/commercial registrant community (read: IPC/ISPC/BC).
I think the paper is correct in pointing out that contracted parties do need some sort of grouping, but it forgets that registrants (of all types) are a highly important component of this. My strongest preference has always been to provide the contracted parties with 1/2 of the vote of the Council, and the user community with the other 1/2. How the 1/2s get divided up is a matter for discussion, but I think its time for a serious discussion of these matters before some half-baked scheme like this commercial power grab gets institutionalized.
Sorry for cross posting this - not sure where this thread should actually live.
/ross
____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ