Tarek Kamel wrote:
> just a another small comment before the formulation starts, I do also
> support a stronger role for the ISOC chapters as they play a major role
> of THE forum for Internet diffusion in a lot of the developing countries.
Tarek:
That may be true, but the question is whether these chapters are *already* represented
through ISOC. Giving them an additional vote may unfairly multiply the influence of a
specific organization. I note in this regard that you are on the Board of trustees of
the Internet Society. So presumably the Egyptian ISOC chapter is quite well represented
by the parent organization. Do you feel you need another vote?
The case of ISOC is even more complicated than, say, ACM or CPSR or other
organizations with international chapters, because ISOC straddles several functions
within ICANN. ISOC is heavily represented in the PSO, for example. ISOC is primarily
known for housing of the Internet Architecture Board and its service as the legal
entity for IETF. In this role, it has a major impact, if not the dominant role in PSO.
PSO elected Vint Cerf, founder of ISOC and Board member of ISOC, to the ICANN Board.
Jun Murai, who has held roles in both ISOC parent organization and ISOC Japan, was
selected for the initial Board of ICANN. Mike Roberts, another founding ISOC member, is
the CEO of ICANN. The late Jon Postel, another ISOC charter member, selected the
initial Board of ICANN.
Many ASO members also have strong connections to ISOC. ICANN Board member Pindar Wong,
for example.
And I would note that Alejandro Pisanty, of ISOC mexico, was elected to ICANN Board
from DNSO despite lacking voting membership. There was nevertheless widespread support
for him among the non-commercial constituency, because he was a constructive force. So
the absence of a formal voting role for ISOC-Mexico does not mean exclusion at all.
Then there are organizations, such as the Policy Oversight Committee (POC), which was
formed by ISOC and consists almost entirely of ISOC members, which have joined our
constituency. Pindar was also a member of POC.
Can anyone reasonably conclude that ISOC in all its manifestations is insufficiently
represented within ICANN? Or even the DNSO?
My concern is that we badly need to make ICANN *more* representative and more broadly
based than it is now. The ISOC parent organization has played a dominant -- and, some
feel, overly aggressive -- role in the early stages of Internet governance. To multiply
its influence by allowing a single organization to accumulate large blocs of votes in
an already-fragile constituency seems extremely dangerous to me. And I don't think I am
the only one, though I may be the only one tactless enough to say it explicitly.
--MM
--- You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: Kent@SONGBIRD.COM To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1729M@lyris.isoc.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 09 2000 - 13:20:39 PDT