Re: [ga] At-Large membership: definition

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Okay, include me Vittorio. I'd like to be a member and according to your
post I qualify. When can I start?

Chris McElroy, President, Kidsearch Network
Constituency, Parents of Missing Children who are all individual users as
well.
http://www.kidsearchnetwork.org

PS: Vittorio, that has got to be the lamest explanation I've ever seen for
catering to the lawyers.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vittorio Bertola" <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large membership: definition


> Danny Younger ha scritto:
> > Vittorio,
> >
> > I refer you to the Membership Advisory Committee
> > Commentary on the Principles of the At-large
> > Membership:
> >
> > 1. At-large membership should primarily represent
> > those individuals and organizations that are not
> > represented by the Supporting Organizations (SOs).
> > http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rcs/macberlin.html
> >
> > In view of this definition (arrived at by consensus
> > through the ICANN process), can you explain to me on
> > what basis the ALAC certified the Intellectual
> > Property & Technology (IPT) Section of the Hawaii
> > State Bar Association as an at-large structure?
> >
> > Intellectual property lawyers are already represented
> > within the GNSO.  They have a constituency called the
> > Intellectual Property Constituency.  Why didn't you
> > refer these applicants to their proper home within
> > ICANN instead of bastardizing the concept of At-Large
> > membership even further?
>
> I can only tell you what were my own reasons for voting in favour.
>  From the diligence we made, it seems that the applicant is looking
> towards a broader perspective than the simple promotion of IP interests
> - they are apparently not interested in acting just as IP lawyers, but
> rather as individual users of the net. My idea is that - in the same
> spirit as in the original At Large elections, by the way - no one should
> be prevented from joining the At Large; that's exactly the sense of the
> term "primarily" in the document you quote, which, by the way, is not
> the binding definition of our constituency and mission, which is rather
> to be found in the ICANN Bylaws, and where the focus - appropriately, I
> think - is shifted from "everyone else" to "individual users of any kind".
> You should look at the At Large in the overall, not in its individual
> constituents; the only way to prevent capture by any group is for all
> groups to participate. I am looking forward to see other groups and
> organizations participating in the future - the solution is to be more
> inclusive, rather than less inclusive.
> Regards,
> -- 
> vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
> http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...