Cyber-Federalist No. 3 "Why ICANN's Elections Matter"
The spirit of this is ok overall, but it does not go far enough to question the amount as well as the legitimacyof the $50K fee.
It also doesn't address the fact that even if the at large members happen to vote anyone onto the board, it will not happen in time to affect the TLD policy and the imposition of that controversial fee.
As it seems that you prefer to use "lite and friendly" language (not
necessarily a bad thing) perhaps you can include those serious issues in
a more "lite and friendly" but explicit way. You do have a way with
diplomatic language, but please don't be so diplomatic as to water down
or ignore the obvious controversies, nor seduce readers into believing
that ICANN will change if everyone votes. I have my doubts and rightfully
so, but I would go along with the sincere effort to effect democracy and
change if it's at all possible...but I won't bet my life on it!
"I wrote to you earlier about ICANN's (proper) reluctance to take on the task of determining who would qualify for a fee reduction......How do we distinguish between "legitimate" organizations and fronts for content control, anti-unionism, whatever you're against? We'd rather let independent foundations/donors determine whom they want to sponsor, just as foundations sponsor them for rent, servers, personnel costs and the like. Meanwhile, with a cheaper fee that didn't cover our costs, innocent users would be indirectly subsidizing the commercial people who want to run registries.
In the end, our job is not to foster freedom of speech. Our job is to make sure other people can't use us to control it.
Other board affiliations (among many): EFF (now retired, but past chairman),
Eurasia Foundation, Santa Fe Institute, Soros Internet Medical Project,
Created before October 2004