I agree with Kent on this one -- we really need to embrace diverse views,
not reject them. If ICANN were to require that people strongly adhere to
its concepts and goals I could foresee that some of us might find
ourselves being shown the door.
> Personally, I don't think that owning a domain should be a
> requirement for membership.
That's a tough one and I'm in sympathy with the notion of opening it up to
anybody and everybody who could ever have a domain name, in other words
everbody.
I get the impression however, that we have to draw some lines somewhere.
And having actual ownership, or the effective equivalent, seems to be a
workable line. And, as others have mentioned, one can always obtain an
undisputed name on which to base membership for not too many dollars.
(Yes, I know that that would really feel like a rotten thing when somebody
has taken the name that I had and really want to use.)
> "Any real individual with an interest in Domain Names may
> participate. Proof of existence may be required."
I'd like that. But I'm not sure we could squeeze that past the ICANN
board, since they seem to want to have some boundaries.
> One of the problems I see with any form of IDNO is that it is a
> *intrinsically* in conflict with the notion of a General Assembly.
I think what we will get to here is a revival of our now age-old dispute
about the relative powers of the ICANN board versus the powers of the SOs.
The NC has certain powers and the GA has certain powers. One thing that I
hope we can agree on is that those powers only partially overlap. It's in
those areas of non-overlap that make membership in both the NC and the GA
each important, and different.
So it is important for the IDNO to be a constituency.
> It is intrinsically in conflict, because the characteristic of
> "individual domain name holder" is covers an extremely broad range of
> interests
Right. I have trademarks of my own and by some very long stretches of
imagination I could be considered an ISP. Since the constituency
boundaries are not drawn using consistent criteria it is impossible to
prevent overlap.
>From what I've seen the current thinking on membership is to let the IDNO
be a place where individuals can go *unless* they opt to be in another
constituency. .
--karl--
-- This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz. For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/