[ALSC-Forum] What users will (and won't) do.

[Thomas Roessler]

With respect to some of the questions from discussion paper #1, the 
following question may be instructive to investigate: Why, in the 
first place, should anyone participate in a mailing list, online 
discussion forum, e-democracy project?  Why should anyone spend time 
on diving into complex topics (such as ICANN)?

That is: What kinds of incentives do people have for participation? 
And what will keep them away?



Of course, the simplest incentive (and, at the same time, one of the 
most powerful ones) is - power.  Let people feel that they are 
heared and have the opportunity to move something, and they'll try 
to contribute.  Give them the feeling that they don't matter because 
the deal has already been fixed behind closed doors, and they'll 
turn away.  The common perception that the ICANN processes are 
actually closed and that public participation is mostly a fig leaf 
will thus frustrate possible participants, and discourage 
participation and self-organizing efforts.

Don't frustrate those who try to participate and contribute. The 
best outreach program is to take users' concerns and input 
seriously.  This implies that users must be informed in a timely 
fashion, and not one week before the yearly meeting.  At least make 
sure people can read the papers you publish in the time you leave.



Another important incentive are actual or perceived attacks onto 
actual or perceived assets.  Consider the DNSO GA discussions on the 
.com/.org/.net agreements' revision.  There was quite a bit of 
traffic concerning the fears that current .org domains may be taken 
away (a topic which was even called a "red herring" by Kent Crispin, 
<20010306131534.A438@songbird.com>).  Consider the recent .kids 
discussions which (after quite some time of silence) brought 
icann-europe back to life for a short time: Those involved in that 
discussion didn't like the idea that ICANN should be controlled and 
possibly micro-managed by US lawmakers.

In the absence of such incentives, individual users in general won't 
contribute to individual questions of the ICANN process (or, for 
that matter, any political process).  This does, however, not mean 
that such questions don't influence individuals' lifes and 
activities, and it also does not mean that they shouldn't have a 
voice in detail decisions.

In fact, we have arrived at the classical argument in favor of 
representative democracies: Don't expect direct user (or citizen) 
input on arcane topics which don't bear any incentive for users to 
deal with them. Input on such topics will and must be provided by 
"experts".  ICANN structure should make sure that these experts are 
determined in a way which makes them accountable to end users, so 
these experts have an incentive to act in the users' best interests.



-- 
Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.org/