RE: [ALSC-Forum] Comments on Study: Must groups oppose individuals -

[Bruce Young]

Reply to Karl Auerbach:

>Before getting to far, one has to recognize that the DNSO is a part of 
>ICANN  that is focused on Domain Name Policy.  There are two other SO's in 
>ICANN that focus on other policy matters.
>
>There is a move to admit individuals who have domain names into the DNSO.
>But that is a matter distinct and apart from ICANN's At-Large.

Yes.  This continues to be brought into the conversation. However, as you
note, the DNSO General Assembly's fight for recognition within the
DNSO is a side issue that IMO is of far less import than gaining a voice for
the At-Large community!  

(BTW, I don't disagree with the idea of admitting name holders to the DNSO.
I might just be one some day!  And they do have their own issues and a right
to vote on the rules that govern them.) 

>I've spent many, many e-mails reminding people that an individuals 
>consitutency in the DNSO and the at-large are not at all comparable things,

>that they are not interchangeable, that one should not be considered a 
>substitute for the other, and that both ought to exist.

Yes!  And those of us who have been fighting the battle of words over this
are gratified to have you in our camp!  Thank you for being our voice!

>I agree that ICANN ought to have an at large body open to every person who 
>is or who may be affected by the Internet - essentially everyone.
>
>Indeed, I believe further that ICANN should be legally accountable to that 
>at-large body.  (Today ICANN is, as a practical matter, accountable to no 
>person other than the Attorney General of the State of California.)

Yes!  As I've said elsewhere on this forum, if ICANN is to be a legitimate
international authority, it can't depend on any national government (even
the US!) for its legitimacy.  Only a consensus of the global Internet
community at large can legitimize their authority. 

ICANN's credibility continues to degrade with each report that the voice of
the At-Large is being ignored.  Is it not understandable then why rogue root
servers and groups like the Top Level Domain Association are springing up to
fill the void ICANN's lack of credibility has created?  Fractioning the name
space is not going to serve anyone's interests in the long run.  But that is
exactly where we are heading unless the ICANN board (present company and 
maybe Andy Mueller-Maguhn excluded!) understands the depth of the threat, 
and that rapidly embracing the At-Large community to regain credibility is
their only way out!


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