This is a very reasonable question. It won't be well received :)
> Is it being formed just 'because ICANN said so' ?
Well... yes.
> Is it a body to implement industry self regulation?
Well... maybe.
> Is it a social club, with a common interest membership?
Sure. The members meet every month or so in different parts of the world, and
sit for days in a stuffy hotel room arguing over things that will never be
agreed on. It's a punishment we inflict on ourselves for having such fun on the
Internet.
> Is it a producer cartel?
Inspired by the mafia.
> Where is the mission statement, or to put it another way, where is the
> requirements document?
It's called the White Paper. Some people in the USG thought it up in order to
torture the Internet. They said: "Go out and organize yourselves. We can't give
you any real guidance, or any financial assistance, or any legal advice, or even
a place to meet, but go out and get organized and then come back in a while and
tell us how it's going. We'll let you know if you're on the right track (as we
see it). If you're not, then you'll have to start all over again until you get
it right (whatever that means)."
> And don't say the ICANN bylaws, those bylaws have SO's in them because
> supposedly there was a consensus that SO's were desired -
No, there wasn't any consensus that SOs were desired. It's really just a
nebulous idea that Joe Sims thought up on the spot. And it has to be modified
every few weeks by press releases, whenever Joe has a change of mind or had a
bad meal.
> BUT NOBODY EVER SAID WHY!!!
Why? Well... because Joe said so, that's why. I mean, you don't question the
"LEADER".
> Without a clear statement of purpose, the only conclusion that can be made
> is that this is all a power grab, pure and simple.
Now, here you've got it all wrong. It's not a power grab for the simple reason
that there's no longer any power to be grabbed. With the SOs outside ICANN,
their power is an illusion. So it can't be a power grab. It's more like a
smokescreen, a sort of sports activity to keep the DNS people busy while the
ICANN Board decides what it's going to do with the Internet.
> Simple question - without three board seats up for grabs, would anyone be
> bothering with this?
The real question is: Even with three Board seats, is it worth bothering with?
If the ICANN at-large membership doesn't come from the DNS constitutencies, and
is opposed to them (e.g. the trademark people and big business), three Board
seats out of nineteen votes won't make much difference.
But, don't worry about it. Just come along to the next meeting of the DNS club
(that is, the Monterrey chapter, or the ORSC chapter, if you prefer; it's all
the same), and have a good time. The next meeting of our chapter is in
Washington, D.C., and I've heard there will be tours of the train station and
the library as an added attraction. What fun, eh?