RE: [ALSC-Forum] Re: User Interest in ICANN is Broad and Deep

[Bruce Young]

Mike, Mike.  Your own words condemn you!

>If you want to do something expensive, like another ICANN  At Large
>worldwide open election and the related organization to support it,
>and you don't have the money yourself, then you've got to convince
>some folks who do have money to fund it, or you have to round up a
>whole lot of people like yourself with a little money, or both.

I see.  ICANN can spend its funds to support the SOs, but is not willing to
fund, in whole or part, a mandated At-Large effort mandated by its own
incorporating documents?  Since ICANN's funding ultimately flows in large
part from everyone's ISP fees, why should ICANN be unwilling the At Large?
Could it be because ICANN's corporate masters see no profit in it?

>There is no obvious momentum, and as Joop said earlier today, there is no
leadership.
>Of the over seven thousand subscribers to this list, 90% of the postings
>come from fewer than 20 people.

Maybe the rest are simply waiting patiently to participate in whatever is
established.  Have you asked them?  The fact that you know your numbers
shows that you know who they are.

>This is not popular democracy at work.

It certianly isn't!  We're still waiting for the organization to give us the
right to vote!

>As the ALSC and others have said, the existence of an ALSO makes process
>for ICANN harder, not easier.  It would be noisy and it takes time
>and energy and dollars to separate signal from noise and balance it
>against other stakeholder interests.

Yes, making a democracy work well is always a lot harder to manage than an
oligarchy.  And your point is?

Since this is a co-ed forum, I won't even comment on the fact that you
consider At-Large input "noise,"
 and imply that Internet users are not stakeholders.  Consider the words
behind *that* implication said!

Bruce Young
Portland, Oregon
Bruce@barelyadequate.info
http://www.barelyadequate.info