Re: draft proposal for selection of board-Tweak 1.1

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com>]

Diane and all,

Diane Cabell wrote:

> You've put a proposal together very nicely.  Thank you.
>
> 1.  I think there is an unnecessary preponderance of business interests
> (e-commerce, business in general and brand name holders).  Why so many
> variations on the same theme?  This contrasts with only 1 "user" group
> representative and the user group you suggest is one largely populated with
> technical/business representatives. There isn't a real "consumer"
> (non-commercial) representative in your draft.

  Agreed and one of the MAJOR flaws in the nIANA draft.

>
>
> 2. I propose a somewhat larger board (up to 19) with proportional
> representation.

  Good idea.  Proportional to what scheme however?

>
>
> 3. Some interests get minimum representation of 1 seat; most get 2 with one of
> the two necessary non-US while the other may or may not be US.  This is to
> encourage exposure to different interests and perceptions.  The 15-member quota
> is met this way.

  This seems like a jurisdictional restriction that doesn't seem necessary.  We all
use
the same internet, so what does location of Board Representatives have to do with
it?

>
>
> 4. After those slots are filled, if a larger board is necessary to be truly
> representational, the number of seats in (b), (c) and (d) below can be expanded
> by assigning them in proportion to the actual number of existing enterprises
> per continent.  Assume there are ccTLD 50 registrars now, and it is felt that
> political consensus cannot be reached with fewer than 5 seats in this
> category.  If 20 of them are UK entities and 10 are from France, that's 3/5 of
> the whole so 3 of the seats go to representatives of European-incorporated
> registrars (regardless of whether 4 are from Belgium and 1 is from Norway.)
> Like you, I would let the regional trade associations select within their
> geographical area for seats that are business or trade-related.  Numbers and
> proportions can be recalculated periodically.

  Again, what difference does it make where the representatives come form?

>
>
> a. Internet Access Providers - 2 (1 backbone, 1 non-backbone)
> b. gTLD Registries - 3 (or more if drawn from each continent in proportion to
> the number of Registrars incorporated in that continent as per formula above)

  What is the justification for this requirement?  Again, we all use the same
internet.
Let the stakeholders make these choices based on those that are willing to run for
these seats.

> c. ccTLD Registries - 3 (same as above)
> d. Commercial Users - 3 (1 US, 2 non-US each from different continent)
> e. Non-Commercial Users (e.g. consumer rep) - 2 (1 US, 1 non-US)
> f. Regional numbers administrator (e.g RIPE, etc.) - 1
> g. Protocols/IAB - 1
> h. Counsel - 1 (but only if none can be hired by the Board)
>
> 5. Your proposal to have trade groups select candidates is very creative, and
> avoids having to set up a vast voting machinery, but it forces everyone to join
> a group.

  Voting machinery does not need to be vast by any means.  It can be very simple
and straight forward.

> Could not nominations be open to anyone who meets the
> representational criteria (let the competition take on the job of detecting
> disqualification's).  People could register with the entity (for a modest fee
> of, say, $5) to become a voting member (or buy a share of stock).

  Good idea.

>
>
> Diane Cabell, Esq.
> http://www.mama-tech.com
>
> Jim Dixon wrote:
>
> > An incomplete draft proposal describing a mechanism for selecting the
> > board of the new corporation proposed in the White Paper can be seen at
> >
> >         http://www.euroispa.org/papers/balanced.diversity.html
> >
>
> --
> DOMAIN-POLICY administrivia should be sent to <listserv at lists.internic.net>
> To unsubscribe send a message with only one line "SIGNOFF DOMAIN-POLICY"
> For more help regarding Listserv commands send the one line "HELP"

 Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com