Personal tools
You are here: Home InternetNZ Activity International ICANN Archive The State of ICANN

The State of ICANN

(www.icannatlarge.org)

Paper for the International Committee of InternetNZ.

ICANN has no individual members, no voters, no electorate. No "At Large".

For years now, I have argued that there should be members, that the Board should be elected and that there should be a Constitutional document for ICANN that guarantees broader input in the decision-making process.

The At Large Study Commission published its conclusion that the ICANN At Large members should be the individual domain name holders. In Accra the Board said, thank you, not now and disbanded the ALSC after having spent US$ 450.000.to let it finish its report.

Since then a demoralized but still somewhat committed group of about 1000 people has signed up to become "the At Large" and carry-on with self-organizing.

This movement, started as icannatlarge.com just prior to the ICANN Accra meeting in 2001 and now named icannatlarge.org, is in a difficult phase.

Since the transition to the new web site less than 30 new members have signed up. (to 1071).

Its immediate task is now to produce a Mission Statement and a Constitution that reflects agreement among the membership about rules that will govern its structures and officers.

It faces opposition from among its most active members against retaining "icann" in its name. One of the reasons is ICANN's attitude to only wish to talk to people that it's Board has approved: The ALAC (at large advisory committee).

The members have to decide about incorporation and where. About funding and membership dues.

There has been progress, albeit slow, with the process of self-organisation.

There is currently again an elected panel that is responsible for the content of www.icannatlarge.org.

There is a web site there, partly copied from the original www.icannatlarge.com and an archived members'-only mailing list with some 61 people on it.

There is a Working Group Bylaws (volunteers, not elected), busy finding consensus on a Mission Statement. There is a Verification Committee (volunteers, not elected), to make sure that we keep dealing with real people.

The panel election was a brave effort, but suffered from a few flaws:

the election was not properly supervised bulk seconding by an unverified newcomer, known only to the election organizer, determined the make-up of the candidate list.

However that was, I stood as a candidate and I accepted my seat because the support of around 100 voters was credible to me. The next highest vote getter was David Goldstein with 71 votes. Please refer to http://www.icannatlarge.com/voting.htm.

I accepted the election of the panel as a bootstrap effort and made an election promise to step down after 3 months, encouraging other candidates to do the same and stand for re-election, this time supervised by an elected independent commission.

After the election the panel suffered from the fact that no clear mandate for it had been endorsed by the voters and differences of opinion about the extent of the mandate surfaced.

While on the panel I chaired it for the first three weeks and introduced a number of working rules for the Chair position and the webmaster position that were adopted. I also introduced the anti-hijack concept of a rotating chairmanship, which was also adopted.

This did not last long. During my travel and holidays two panel members were ousted for inactivity and their seats filled with runner-up candidates who accepted those seats. The rotating chair idea was then discarded in favour of two self-nominated candidates (Abel Wisman and Hugh Blair), who were the only candidates for ?permanent chair? and vice-chair. Abel Wisman is also the sysadmin for the servers that host the web site and mailing lists.

IPC election.

I had found panel support for the creation and election of a 3 person Independent Polling Commission and this election is now scheduled to take place on the 26th of September , organized by an interim panel committee.

The following members are standing as candidates:

Micheal Sherrill Walter Schmidt Richard Henderson Mark Poole Joanna Lane Joop Teernstra

As my three months on the panel were up, I had resigned as panelist and then accepted a nomination to stand for the Polling Commission.

Meanwhile, I have proposed a number of bylaw-rules for the Panel which are to undergo democratic debate. Hopefully, this will result in ratification of such rules by the membership.

Similar bylaw rules for the second elected Body of the icannatlarge, the IPC, have to be debated and ratified by the membership as well.

The Independent Polling Commission is there to make sure that the membership is consulted on how the organization will be structured and that nothing important happens without the membership's approval.

For this the membership will be polled, at least once a month. This is a sacrifice that will come from the members active enough to vote regularly, an estimated 230 to 250 at this moment.

There is quite strong internal opposition to the independent role of the IPC, not least from the panel chairs. They have proposed rules that will protect them from snap-elections and allow for the IPC to defer to the panel for other decisions vital for its independent functioning.

The members will have the last word on this and this should put conflict about the principle of division of power behind us.

Interesting times and lots of work ahead.

InternetNZ and the At Large membership of ICANN.

InternetNZ has always been in support of the arguments for more democracy in ICANN, believing that ultimately DNS stability is best served with democracy.

This support has been expressed on a number of occasions in council resolutions to support my work maintaining the icannatlarge web site and my accommodation at ICANN meetings.

Through the sudden generosity of The Salzburg Seminar, InternetNZ was able to save the funds earmarked for my travel to Montevideo in 2001 and use it for another worthy cause.

As a result, InternetNZ has never had the chance to pay for any of my travel, only for some hotel accommodation.

(Ironically it was NSI who paid for my tickets to Berlin and Santiago, when Don Telage was still a VP).

I am now asking for a $5000 support for my trip to Tunisia to attend the ICANN meetings there and find out if quiet diplomacy will work. After sept 11, things have changed. The scope for a world-wide democratic input has considerably narrowed. It is now unlikely that the US Govt would tolerate an ICANN that it did not firmly control.

But there are several ALAC members that I would want to talk to, to see if common ground can be found.

Could the itl.committee see to it that my travel support is on the next Council agenda with a recommendation to act?

I am now preparing my travel for mid October and just a commitment from the Itl. Committee to make such recommendation to council would already be enough for me to decide to go on this trip and spend the time and effort once again.

I will, of course provide reports for council on all meetings I will attend.

-Joop-
Document Actions