Re: [ALSC-Forum] One Person -> One member

[Mikael Pawlo]

At 08.32 -0400 01-09-10, Esther Dyson wrote:
>where did I disagree with you? As I said below, the woman working for Intel
>can vote as she pleases, following intel's suggestion or not.

First - thanks Esther and Pindar for trying to reply to at least some of
the issues addressed here.

I guess the point Eric (correct me if I misread you, Eric) was trying to
make is that she can be constrained by her need for a good relation with
her employeer i e she will vote as Intel tells her to.

My point was another one. I think the domain name holder should have the
vote--that is if we accept this landowner voting mechanism in the first
place (which I don't)--and not some third party individual. It just does
not make sense to me.

Well, I have said this many times now and I won't bother you anymore with this.

My suggestion in respect of the UN or governmental representational model
was not addressed at all during the earlier meeting (I finally finished
listening to the web cast) and it is not addressed in the report. I guess
you could just chuck any suggestion, but it would be a healthy idea for
openness and transparency to address at least some of the suggestions given
on this list. On a related note, the behaviour of the ALSC in this respect
is actually quite amusing in light of Mr Carl Bildt's widespread agony in
the Swedish media for the lack of attention and public debate of the ALSC
work. Did he even submit one (1) message to the ALSC list before publishing
the final draft? I think not.

Just one final question, and--in my view--the most important one: what is
the role and functions of ICANN in fall of 2002? Are we talking new
top-level domain distributor or broad Internet governance?

Regards

Mikael Pawlo
Just representing myself in this forum

_________________________________________________________________________

  ICQ:35638414                              mailto:mikael@pawlo.com
  +46-704-215825                              http://www.pawlo.com/