Re: [ga] Letter to the ALAC

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

ICANN is like a black hole, which sucks people into its methodology.

ALAC is a "mock" At Large, largely dealing with non-democratic organisations, and completely rejecting the concept of a membership of equal individuals. To suggest that these few, selected organisations should "represent" the rank and file ordinary internet users is to miss the point altogether.

There has already been a workable methodology based on individual subscription and one person one vote, on the basis of which the previous (and democratically elected) At Large directors were chosen - by individuals themselves - to represent them.

The whole problem for ICANN was that it did not like the free-thinking individuals who the public chose. So they expelled them.

To entrust the At Large movement to ALAC is to accede to ICANN's agenda... namely, to pay lipservice to individual users but in effect to lock them out. Otherwise, why not just revert to accepting At Large membership on an individual basis (with no mandatory 15 days attendance at ICANN meetings as a prerequisite of membership!).

Danny writes: "It all begins with a conscious effort to collaborate"... I'm afraid I do not believe that individual internet users actually want to collaborate with ALAC because they are denied membership and participation. They do not want to collaborate because they know that ALAC is a top-down creation of ICANN, set up by Denise Michel, without any individual user mandate.

"We have available to us now a methodology for elections by way of local organizations that can serve as an alternative to the type of elections previously held." That is exactly what ICANN wants, but in most democracies we do not vote via delegates for appointees already selected from the top. In most democracies the principle of one person one vote is widely respected.

The type of elections previously held worked. They resulted in popularly-elected representatives.

Their expulsion by the ICANN clique was indefensible.

Individual internet users do not want to be sucked into ICANN's methodology.

They seek their right to elect their own nominees (not from within selected organisations) and they seek to influence and determine for themselves the future direction of their internet - because fundamentally the Internet is used by them, developed by them, and needed by them.

I totally disagree with Danny on this one!

ICANN is a black hole.

ALAC is craven and unrepresentative.

Let Individual Internet Users organise themselves, by opening membership of a recognised At Large to ALL individuals (and NO organisations!), and allowing those individual members to make their own decisions about who will represent them and how they will relate to the ICANN politburo.

Yrs,

Richard Henderson
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Danny Younger 
  To: Hugh Dierker 
  Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 12:00 AM
  Subject: Re: [ga] Letter to the ALAC


  Dear Eric,

  Perhaps you have noticed the WGIG discussions that are based on these principles enshrined in the Geneva Declaration:

    a.. the Internet by now is a global facility 
    b.. its management should be multilateral, transparent and democratic 
    c.. its management should involve fully governments, private sector, civil society and international organizations
  I look forward to the democratic management of the Internet and recognize that if ICANN is to become a more democratic institution (in keeping with the will and consensus of the international community), it will need to allow for the election of at-large directors by way of those organizations that are now being assembled under the auspices of the ALAC.  

  If we seek to fulfill the promise of elected directors on the ICANN Board, our only vehicle is an electoral process that can be conducted by the regional structural units that are now being formed and certified by the ALAC (the process is akin to that of the ICANN constituencies that elect their representatives that in turn elect directors to the Board).  These local and regional structures could also directly support the cost of the election process so that ICANN could not pose the argument of election costs as an impediment to inaugurating an election cycle.

  At issue is whether the ICANN Board regards the Interim ALAC as having reached a sufficient level of maturity to take on the responsibilities that lie on the road ahead.  The first step in proving their capabilities will be the act of seriously taking on the management of the GA list. 

  Their involvement in this process will help to bridge the gap between opposing camps and eventually a consensus should emerge between parties such as yourself and members of the ALAC on the most expeditious way forward to secure the election of At-Large directors.

  It all begins with a conscious effort to collaborate to achieve a mutual goal.  The ALSC recommended that the At-large fill one third of the seats on the ICANN Board.  This was put forth as a consensus position.  The ICANN Board did not challenge that consensus, only the methodology by which at-large directors were to be elected:

    "Whereas, the Board is not persuaded that global elections are the only or the best means of achieving meaningful public representation or the informed participation of Internet users in the ICANN process;"

  We have available to us now a methodology for elections by way of local organizations that can serve as an alternative to the type of elections previously held.  With your input and the help of others in the at-large community, I believe that the election process can be refined to everyone's satisfaction so that individuals within these structures can vote and that provisions can be made for those those that have no such formal membership to vote as well.

  Best regards,

  Danny



  __________________________________________________
  Do You Yahoo!?
  Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
  http://mail.yahoo.com