Thanks, Mary. Yes, I fully expect this is what the CSG folks would
say. But the same argument is true for a number of NCUC members.
For example NCUC member the Association for Progressive
Communications (APC) is an umbrella organization representing
hundreds of smaller NGOs throughout the developing world. So our 142
members also includes associations of smaller organizations just like
the CSG membership will claim for its membership.
Best,
Robin
On Aug 12, 2009, at 11:32 AM, Mary Wong wrote:
> Robin and everyone,
>
> My guess is that these constituencies (certainly the IPC and to
> some extent the BC) will respond by saying, yes but *each* of our
> members (or some, in the case of the BC) is an association/group
> that represents many individuals, firms, corporations and
> organizations. Thus, while our technical member number seem low,
> the reality is that we have literally thousands of participants in
> our constituencies and ICANN.
>
> While we can and should note that participation via indirect
> representation is less truly participatory than direct membership
> (as is the NCUC model), particularly for individuals. Note that
> only organizational members have the right to vote in the IPC, for
> instance. I think, however, that we need to recognize that this
> type of math - however shaky - can at first glance to a hassled and
> overworked Board member seem accurate and true.
>
> I think the best way we can make our case for diversity and
> representation is to combine our statistics with the above; i.e.
> point to our growth, the fact and advantage of direct membership/
> participation, the lack of barriers in NCUC to individuals voting
> and so on.
>
> BTW, thanks to all who commented on the draft Board letter. I'm
> making amendments now and will send out a new version as soon as I
> can.
>
> Cheers
> Mary
>
> Mary W S Wong
> Professor of Law
> Franklin Pierce Law Center
> Two White Street
> Concord, NH 03301
> USA
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Phone: 1-603-513-5143
> Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
> Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network
> (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
>
>
> >>> Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> 8/12/2009 12:13 PM >>>
> The Facts.
>
> Commercial Stakeholder Group Membership.
> According to the Business Constituency's website, they have 44
> members.
> According to the IPR Constituency's website, they have 18 members.
> According to the ISP Constituency's website, (they don't publish
> membership lists and haven't had a post to their email list in
> 2009). But, according the 2006 LSE Report (the last documented
> account of the ISP Constituency's membership, they have 42 members.
>
> So if we add the membership of these 3 commercial constituencies
> together, we get total of 104 members in the Commercial
> Stakeholder Group, who will elect 6 GNSO Councilors.
>
> Contrast:
> NCUC has 142 members but noncommercial users will not be allowed to
> elect any of our new GNSO Councilors on the claim that we are too
> small to deserve to elect all 6 GNSO Councilors.
>
> Did anyone from ICANN staff/SIC do any math before they ruled non-
> commercial users are too small to deserve to elect all 6 GNSO
> Councilors?
> NCSG membership = 142 members (allowed 3 elected representatives)
> CSG membership = 104 members (allowed 6 representatives)
>
> What was the decision-making process that led to ICANN's
> determination that noncommercial users are too small? Seriously,
> we deserve to know how they arrived at that decision and upon what
> facts the decision was based - it is our elected representation
> that they are meddling with. ICANN will have to answer this.
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask]
|
