On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 12:05:25PM -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
> The point of these membership restrictions was to protect the integrity of
> the NCC. I am concerend about actual membership being swamped with casual
> and stacked participants from other constituencies. Note that the vast
> majority of NCC organizations are completely ineligible to vote or even
> participate in the affairs of other constituencies.
The vast majority of businesses are completely ineligible to vote in the
NCC. As far as general participation is concerned, the other
constituencies vary. The hated IPC constituency explicitly allows
participation by non-members, interestingly enough.
Moreover, the language in our charter:
We recognize that some organizations that are non-profit and engage
in non-commercial activities may be eligible for other DNSO
constituencies, but in order to focus the efforts of the NCDNHC,
such organizations are eligible for voting membership in the NCDNHC
only if they are not voting members in any other DNSO Constituency.
is clearly foul of the ICANN bylaws quoted by Adam. In addition:
1) it is a restriction with very little application, effectively only
applying to registrars and registries, and they don't have much interest
in the NCC. Bill Semich (who has a long history of supporting
non-commercial activities in other areas, and who clearly has an
interest in the work of this constituency) is the only example where
this comes to mind.
2) it is singularly ineffective. It is so very easy to create a
non-profit organization. I trust you have all had a chance to look at
"crispinfamily.org" :-), but it is essentially trivial to create a
non-profit organization. [It takes decidedly more work to become a
for-profit business.]
-- Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be kent@songbird.com lonesome." -- Mark Twain
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 04 2000 - 08:26:16 PDT