[ALSC-Forum] Comments on Study: Must groups oppose individuals - Thoughts about the ICANN at-large membership

[Bruce Young]

Comments on Study: Must groups oppose individuals - Thoughts about the ICANN
at-large membership
<http://www.connected.org/govern/ICANN-Zurich.html>

>It would be easy enough to decide that the group should include only those
people who are domain name owners. This idea is currently under
>discussion within the Domain Name Support Organisation (DNSO). However,
this exclusive definition apparently leaves some dissatisfaction 
>is the "at-large" group remains on the cards. One person asked me, "What
about those people who are interested and willing to participate in 
>the process but who do not own a domain name?" You could of course define
membership in terms of interest. Tacitly, this is what ICANN 
>is done. If you show interest by applying to join the at-large membership
and you have access to the Internet because the process is only 
>accessible via the Internet, then you can belong and vote. 

Yes.  The stakes are too high to limit the @Large community to only those
who hold a domain name.  For every one of these, there are thousands of
Internet users whose lives and futures will be directly affected by
decisions made by this body.  They deserve a voice.

>There is no satisfactory global organisation of users of the Internet.

That is what we hope the @Large community can become.

>Maybe the notion of "Internet user" is no longer a sufficiently strong
criterion for people to identify with it. Would you join an electricity
users' 
>or a water users' organisation?

Actually, as a voting citizen and taxpayer in this country, I already have a
great deal to say about how public utilities are managed, and direct redress
through city council meetings, public utility council meetings, etc., if I
disagree with that management.  As is implied in this statement, in the
future continuous, reliable access to the Internet is going to be just as
critical to the safety and happiness of our lives as the other public
utilities mentioned.  Internet users need a voice in how the Internet is
managed.  The @Large community is our best shot at one.

>Is there not a fundamental contradiction in wishing to "organise" people
who seek to act in their own name as individuals, as free valences? 

I disagree.  Every citizen in this country has their own list of issues!
But we join interest groups.  We form coalitions.  We join together to
protest.  We talk to journalists.  We write, call and e-mail our elected
officials.  We attend government meetings and complain.  We vote for things
we approve of, and against things we don't.  Eventually, out of all these
disparate voices expressing their views, convincing others of the rightness
of their concern, and exercising their right to vote, comes policies, laws
and sometimes great changes to society.  This process is called consensus.
It is the core of democracy.  And it should be the at the core of how ICANN
works as well.  That is the role I envision @Large playing.


Bruce Young
Portland, Oregon
byoung651@home.com
http://members.home.net/byoung651/index.html