<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Won't happen as not al ccTLDs are or will remain members of ccNSO.</div><div><br></div><div>You can't have an internal, select group as members.</div><div><br></div><div>All or none, in my view.</div><div><br></div><div>How are ISOC, the Red Cross/Crescent (etc), Doctors without Borders, or similar Non-Profits set up?</div><div><br></div><div>el<br><br>-- <span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); "></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13pt; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.231373);">Sent from </span><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Dr Lisse's iPhone 5s</span></div><div><br></div></div><div><br>On Jan 20, 2015, at 20:38, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <<a href="mailto:ocl@gih.com">ocl@gih.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>Dear Jordan,</span><br><span></span><br><span>thanks for your looking into this in further detail.</span><br><span>My comment below:</span><br><span></span><br><span>On 19/01/2015 16:00, Jordan Carter wrote:</span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>It would be straightforward and possible to make e.g. SO and AC chairs</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>effective "members" of ICANN (we define our own membership system). It</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>would be harder to allow individuals with some standing to join</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>stakeholder constituencies of voters and then allocate shares of total</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>votes across these in a fair way. It would be possible but mad to have</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>a "one member one vote" system where a ccTLD manager had the same say</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>as an Internet user.</span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>Isn't what you're describing ICANN version 1, with thousands of</span><br><span>individual voters? I agree that did not work and will not work today</span><br><span>either. However, I would also really urge caution in turning ICANN into</span><br><span>a purely membership organisation that allocates shares of total votes</span><br><span>according to size of organisational members. I have seen membership</span><br><span>organisations being captured by large players buying out smaller players</span><br><span>- the endgame being $$$ controlling the organisation and *not* the</span><br><span>public interest.</span><br><span>Kind regards,</span><br><span></span><br><span>Olivier</span><br><span></span><br><span>-- </span><br><span>Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD</span><br><span><a href="http://www.gih.com/ocl.html">http://www.gih.com/ocl.html</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>