The question of Ethics was raised,
not because cybersquatting is or isn't ethical (that's a decision for the entire
membership to make with their votes, potentially, and will likely be debated later,
but 2 am isn't the time for that ;-)), but whether the candidate will disclose that
potentially harmful information. Legality and Ethics
do not have a one to one correspondance. It would be legal for me to engage
in ad hominem attacks against you personally, rather than discuss your points.
It would not, however, be ethical.
In the 1950s, it
was illegal in certain parts of the United States for a non white to use a bathroom,
water fountain, etc. designated for whites only. However, it would not have
been unethical to violate those laws (at least, as seen from today's ethical standards.)
The ultimate purpose of ICANN @Large membership, and the Board
member that I will elect, as I see it, is not to "make use of Internet community
expertise", but rather, to ensure that the voice of the regular internet user is
heard. The Community Expertise, as far as techical knowledge goes, is already
well (some would say overly) represented. The average internet user is
not represented at all, currently. That is what this election is supposed to
remedy (at least, in principle.)
As far as the question
of the ethics of cybersquatting, I am more than willing to engage in a discussion
of that, but it's been a struggle for me to get this much out at this time of morning,
and I'll be plesantly surprised if any of my sentences are intelligable in the morning.
;-)
However, at this stage, no one is ruling
out someone who may have cybersquatted.. only asking that this information is fully
disclosed. Individual @large members may decide, as a voting decision, to refuse
to vote for anyone who ever cybersquatted.. that's their right to hold that opinion.
I think most, however, will be willing to consider the exact details of the case
involved, and judge it on a case by case basis.. and the rest of us probably couldn't
care less if someone cybersquatted or not... a few might even be _more_ likely to
vote for a cybersquatter, on the theory that such a person has more 'vision' than
most to take advantage of the potential of the internet ;-)