Re: [ifwp] Re: Specific Suggestion on IANA/NSI Draft

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

Harold and all,

Harold Feld wrote:

> On 09/17/98, "Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>" wrote:
> > Harold and all,
> >
> >   First let me say for our organization INEG. INC. that most of the points that
> > Harold makes here as possible amendments we agree with in principal.
> > (Those that we do not  agree with are indicated below his proposed amendments).
> >
>
> I wrote:
>
> > > 4) Article V Section 14 Regular Meetings
> > > The following language should be included:  "There is a strong presumption
> > > that regular meetings of the Board of Directors will be open to the public.
> > >  Therefore, unless the Board by majority vote declares the meeting close,
> > > members of the public will permitted to attend these meetings.  The Board
> > > may require that those wishing to attend notify the Board in advance.
> > > A meeting may be called as a closed meeting, in which case the Board must
> > > reaffirm that the meeting will be closed by majority vote at least 72 hours
> > > before the meeting.  Voting shall take place by telephone or email, as
> > > described elsewhere in these bylaws.
>
> Jeff adds:
>
> >
> >   We would add the following amendment to this section:All meetings should be
> > open to the public and all stakeholders/members should have equal
> > representation in conjunction to the SO's and the board.  Any resolutions
> > determined
> > as a result of these meetings should be made available for a vote by the
> > Stakeholders
> > and/or members, which include each and every Internet user irrespective or their
> >
> > standing as a member of the internet community before that resolution or
> > amendment
> > is adopted.
>
> I agree with this principle, provided there is some mechanism by which the
> Board can discuss those internal matters which must, as a matter of law, be
> kept confidential. e.g., possible litigation matters where privilege will
> be lost if the discussion is not confidential.

  Hummmm?  I am not sure that such discussions are necessary or certainlymandated by
law as a non-profit company where the membership consisting
of both SO's (Supporting Organizations) AND Individual membership not
related to in any manner or form to any SO.

  From what is required by the White Paper, and from our preliminary review of this
latest release of these Joint NSI/IANA set of bylaws and articles of incorporation, do
not meet
even by a stretch of anyone's imagination and also do not incorporate most of the
IFWP consensus issues, the primary consideration of Individual membership as is
mandated in the White Paper.

>
>
> > > In addition, the following specific language should be included somewhere:
> > > "An SO may not exclude an organization based on economic criteria.  If the
> > > SO requires a membership fee, and the applicant meets all other objective
> > > criteria for membership, than, upon a proper showing of need, the SO shall
> > > waive the membership fee and any other dues, fees or payments that would
> > > prevent the applicant from joining the SO."
> > >
> > > Reason: This language is necessary to prevent lockout.  For example, most
> > > of the public interest groups could not afford the $10,000 to join CORE.
> > > What stops a Names Council consisting of wealthy trade organizations and
> > > large corporations from excluding smaller entities by requiring an up-front
> > > $50,000 payment to join?
> >
> >   It is for this reason that there is a need for individual membership and that
> > theindividual member has an equal standing with any SO as far as voting
>
> I agree.  The draft recognizes the rights for SOs to have individual
> members (if desired), but it does not require them to have such members
> and, if such members are permitted, does not stop the SOs from constructing
> other barriers to entry.

  Precisely why Individual member ship must be incorporated into the bylaws andadded
to the Articles of incorporation in such a method where those articles
and not amenable without the vote of the total membership basis on a simple majority
of all of the membership to include Individual membership.  This builds in
accountability
and provides for growth of the Internet in such a manner were less financially
advantaged individuals and companies from economically deprived areas of the globe
have an equal and participating ability to participate in a meaningful manner.

>
>
> Harold Feld
>
> __________________________________________________
> To view the archive of this list, go to:
> http://lists.interactivehq.org/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=ifwp
>
> To receive the digest version instead, send a
> blank email to ifwp-digest@lists.interactivehq.org
>
> To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
> subscribe-IFWP@lists.interactivehq.org
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
> unsubscribe-ifwp@lists.interactivehq.org
>
> Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email andy@interactivehq.org.
> ___END____________________________________________

 Regards,

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