This working document reflects the ongoing progress of queries and comments by members of the ICANN Membership Advisory Committee and other contributors.  It does not represent final conclusions or recommendations of the committee or its members; indeed, many members have suggested various conflicting alternative approaches for consideration.  Where possible, contributions are identified by author and date.  To contribute to the Membership Advisory Committee process, please subscribe to its public discussion list.  Or, post a comment corresponding to an individual discussion topic or question by clicking on the corresponding .  (View all such comments here.)

Question Outline

0.0  PURPOSE 

0.1  Why are there at large members?  (Daniel Kaplan, Dec. 29) 
0.2  Are there/why are there members that are not at-large members? (Daniel Kaplan, Dec. 29) 
 

0.0  PURPOSE 

0.1  Why are there at large members? (Daniel Kaplan, Dec. 29) 

• Because SO membership rules may eventually exclude some stakeholders (for example, the Address SO may decide it is only open to registries and ISPs, not to other IP address owners). So these people must have somewhere to go if they want to. However, if SOs are very open, this reason might not stand.  (Daniel Kaplan, Dec. 29)
 
• Because some stakeholders may wish to be able to defend their interests and points of view, without willing to spend a lot of time in day-to-day, sometimes arcane SO discussions. (Daniel Kaplan, Dec. 29)

 
0.2  Are there/why are there members that are not at-large members?  (Dan Steinberg, Dec. 29) 
 
• Cannot the at-large structure (whatever it becomes) encompasss the various groups that are covered in the envisaged support organizations?  Eliminating membership from the supporting organizations would appear to solve numerous questions, such as membership in more than one camp, conflict of interest, etc.  (Dan Steinberg, Dec. 29)

Thanks to the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School for assistance in administering this bulletin board and to Velvet Cafe for providing the discussion board software and support.