Re: [IDNO-DISCUSS] [Fwd: Re: [wg-c-1] WORK: Question #1 New

Joop Teernstra (terastra@terabytz.co.nz)
Mon, 12 Jul 1999 11:16:28 +1200


At 07:51 AM 12/07/1999 +1200, Andy Gardner wrote:
>>In principle, it seems to me that IDNO should advocate opening up GTLD's
>>with all due dispatch.
>
>In principle, I think IDNO should advocate the DNSO and ICANN not doing one
>more damn thing until the IDNO is given the constituency placing it
>deserves,and the initial/interim non-elected board is replaced as per the
>original white paper.
>
>

Andy, you take the words from my mouth here.

I feel very uncomfortable that we are forced to take positions on issues of
substance while the ICANN Board and those already blessed as "official"
constituencies can sit back and listen to us and *then* judge whether they
want us as "recognized" discussion partners.

We should not go into details (and certainly not into concessions), beyond
advocating the interests of the Individual Domain Name owner in general,
unless we are first given due respect as a constituency of stakeholders.
Otherwise, we legitimize the current DNSO, while they, and ICANN, do not
legitimize us.

--Joop Teernstra LL.M.-- , bootstrap of
the IDNO Association,
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
http://www.idno.org
-
This message was sent via the IDNO-DISCUSS mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno-discuss" to
majordomo@idno.org. For more information, see http://www.idno.org/