Re: [ga] RE: GA irrelevant

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

I like this sentiment.  Too often we use categories to exclude. Too often I 
find myself holding back on professional personal data so as not to 
get pigeon holed. Bad enough that I am a large American White Guy middle aged.
A nod would be good from the ICANN insiders.  Actually though I think Roberto 
has been, nodding, winking, coaxing and damn near pleading for these folks to 
submit.

--- On Wed, 5/26/10, Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] RE: GA  irrelevant
To: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>
Cc: "GNSO GA Mailing List" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 1:52 AM


On 05/25/2010 09:19 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Non commercial registrants don't need a miracle.  The Noncommercial
> Stakeholder Group (NCSG) already allows for individual noncommercial
> registrants to apply for membership.

It's easy to box those legal fictions known as "corporations" and 
"associations" and "partnerships" into commercial (or not) boxes - that's 
because their formation and legal existence is premised on their engagement in 
economic activities.

But human registrants don't fit nicely into the "commercial" and 
"non-commercial" buckets.  We people simultaneously bathe in the stream of 
commerce and the stream of non-commercial life.

It's rather Procrustean to cut and stretch us in order to fit us onto ICANN's 
"non-commercial" iron bed.

For example, my "cavebear.com" is used by me for both commercial and 
non-commercial purposes.  I am just as much at home in ICANN's commercial 
groups as in the non-commercial ones.

And one's activities may change their color over time - for instance things 
like Google started out as non-commercial experiments by individual people.

(By-the-way, I agree with Roberto that the burden of moving forward is on the 
aspirants to form the new group.  I was just suggesting that ICANN's board give 
a nod of encouragement.)

    --karl--