For a long time I was watching and waiting: all the questions and arguments against splitting NCSG had been raised properly – why should I add my voice? But all this did not seem to lead to any substantial response from those proposing the creation of NPOC. When I say “substantial” I mean: in direct response to specific, direct questions.
Thanks to Milton for summing up the concerns raised, looking back on a history (I have been involved and representing an NGO in Cambodia among the non-commercials of ICANN since 1999) which is difficult enough to understand – like the fact to which Milton points here; I do not believe in re-inventing the wheel, so I repeat what he wrote:
"Note that ICANN Inc. is currently paralyzing new constituency formation in NCSG because it won’t approve a charter that was approved overwhelmingly by its noncommercial participants. Note how it uses the alleged lack of widespread participation in NCUC to manipulate our representation in GNSO, but ignores a far less diverse showing in the CSG."
Or, as Avri said on NPOC:
"- does it have a specific non commercial focus on some aspect of ICANN issues
- does it avoid overlap with existing constituencies
- is it international in scope"
I will take up another point which Bill Drake had raised some time ago – again, I have not seen any effort to respond to that (if there was a response to the point, and if I missed it – apologies. Please send it again. Here, we sometimes miss some mail.
Here – that is in Cambodia.
Bill had asked:
"I will simply reiterate what I've been asking for some time now without ever getting a response. If their proposed members are mostly humanitarian and service provisioning orgs, what would be the problem with call it the Humanitarian and Service Provider Organization Constituency, or something similar? What's wrong with a title that accurately described the membership and focus, rather than one that attempts to colonize the broad rubric applicable to all NCSG members exclusively for a subset thereof? " Does anybody really think – I mean also including people on the ICANN board – that there is a genuine interest among a substantial number of non-commercial organizations, in the different geographical regions of ICANN, who have a track record of working together for some time, so that they now want to have their common not-for-profit cause (representing commercial entities) formalized in an ICANN related platform in the NPOC structure? But there are many non-commercials and individuals, concerned with and struggling to get their voices heard - corporately and operationally - in the field of Internet development, regulations, and use, to strengthen the stability and security of the Internet (the ICANN raison d'etre) in a context where we face quite some other kinds of problems, related, for example, to the freedom of expression on which the member governments of the UN have agreed – but which are fragile and under threat in a number of these same countries in our, and in some other regions of the world.
Norbert Klein
Open Institute
Cambodia