Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] ISOC to bid on .org

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

Todd, all assembly members, stakeholders or interested parties,

todd glassey wrote:

> So then there needs to be two sets of administrative data. The public and
> the non public.

  Why?  What is the justification for such?  Or is this just YOUR opinion?
I think the latter is the case here...

> Seems pretty simple.

  Not really.  Unless only one "Version" of Whois is available or used,
and in that version, no personal and private information is displayable
in a Whois look-up.  Now THAT is simple!  >;)

>
>
> Todd
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> To: "todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>
> Cc: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>; "Kent Crispin"
> <kent@songbird.com>; <discuss@icann-ncc.org>; "atlarge discuss list"
> <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>; "General Assembly of the DNSO"
> <ga@dnso.org>
> Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 7:05 PM
> Subject: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] ISOC to bid on .org
>
> > Todd and all,
> >
> > todd glassey wrote:
> >
> > > The problem with the WHOIS data is that so much of it is bogus. Many
> many
> > > domains are registered with fictitious names and addresses.
> >
> >   Yes this is a problem.  But it is one that has been a knee jerk
> > reaction
> > from registrants wanting their privacy protected in Whois data, and
> > ICANN
> > refusing to acknowledge that.  All that is needed is valid contact
> > for the Admin. for the Domain Name.  The registrants private and
> > personal physical address is not needed.  Hence fictitious addresses
> > and E-Mail contact addresses are used as a workaround.  This of course
> > can and does cause various problems that could be avoided were it not
> > for the ICANN staff and to a lesser degree, the ICANN BoD's refusal
> > to recognize the right to a persons personal privacy..
> >
> > > One of my
> > > favorites was one domain registered with its local address as an empty
> > > field. The email address was a Yahoo one and disappeared right after the
> > > domain was issued.
> > >
> > > The problem is that the registrar's know that this is going on and
> without a
> > > reason to change, they have no impetus to make sure that the domain name
> > > contact points are real.
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>
> > > To: "Kent Crispin" <kent@songbird.com>; <discuss@icann-ncc.org>
> > > Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 8:07 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] ISOC to bid on .org
> > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Kent Crispin" <kent@songbird.com>
> > > > : Does this mean that you are strongly in favor of accurate, public
> whois
> > > > : data?
> > > >
> > > >  I do believe that a government policy in favor of accurate whois data
> is
> > > a
> > > > reasonable measure to address unlawful activity on the Internet.  How
> > > > "public" that data is probably not a simple binary set of choices, and
> I
> > > > also support methods of addressing legitimate privacy concerns.  But I
> > > would
> > > > certainly agree that the MPAA or the BSA should be able to determine
> who
> > > is
> > > > the registrant for a web site that was disseminating infringing
> materials,
> > > > and I understand why governments want to require this.  I don't think
> > > ICANN
> > > > itself has to go further in terms of enforcement of copyright or other
> law
> > > > enforcement issues, other than to obey laws passed by real
> governments.
> > > >
> > > > :
> > > > : >   The fact that it is "working" in the CIRA is relevant
> > > > : > information.
> > > > :
> > > > : Nope.  Not "fact".
> > > > :
> > > > : 1) It is not a "fact" that it is "working" for CIRA - the low
> turnouts
> > > > : raise some serious questions that you and Hans wave away because it
> > > > : doesn't fit with your ideology.
> > > >
> > > >      This is insulting and silly.  What is your "ideology" about the
> CIRA?
> > > > Is it "ideological" to disagree with you?  What is the "ideology"
> > > regarding
> > > > popular democratic elections?  Being against fascism, communism or
> other
> > > > authoritarian systems?  This is really silly.   I'm happy to look at
> more
> > > > elitist models, and have even proposed one that I would be ok with.
> If
> > > you
> > > > shrunk ICANN and have a narrow terms of reference, you could probably
> have
> > > > lots of different entities do it, maybe even John Postel if he was
> still
> > > > around.   But looking at the well functioning .ca ccTLD, which works,
> is
> > > > stable, has a well qualified board, and has adopted "best practice"
> > > > policies, makes it hard to dismiss, unless one has a bias.
> > > >
> > > > What is your point on the turnout?  How can you say that any
> partricular
> > > > level of turnout is too low?  You just winging this one?  Because you
> > > don't
> > > > like Karl and Andy?  I have said that a 1 percent turnout for the GDSO
> > > would
> > > > be fine with me.   What is your basis for saying 1 percent would be
> too
> > > low?
> > > >
> > > > I would be happy to take a random sample of domain holders, and have
> them
> > > > choose some board members.   Lots of things might work.  You never
> bother
> > > to
> > > > defend anything positive in terms of board selection.  You hate
> popular
> > > > elections, but what is your alternative?
> > > >
> > > > : 2) It is not a "fact" that the CIRA elections are relevant to ICANN.
> > > >
> > > >     Certainly they are relevant, but also certrainly some ICANN staff
> and
> > > > Board want to pretend they are not relevant.
> > > >
> > > > :
> > > > : >  The fact that Jonathan Cohen is on both the CIRA and the
> > > > : > ICANN board illustrates that ICANN board me be over reacting to
> Karl
> > > and
> > > > : > Andy's elections.
> > > > :
> > > > : Nope.  Not fact that Jonathan Cohen's positions illustrates anything
> > > > : about the ICANN's boards reactions.  The quality of the elected
> > > > : directors is simply a red herring.  The issue is the director
> selection
> > > > : process, not the current directors.
> > > >
> > > >     The quality of the elected directors seems to be one of the two
> most
> > > > important outcomes to me.  The second one being fairness.
> > > >
> > > >     When ICANN can come up with a system that addresses both the
> quality
> > > and
> > > > the fairness issue, let's look at it, as a real alternative to a
> popular
> > > > democracy.    We know what you don't like.  What do you like?
> > > >
> > > > : > I'm not really a hard liner even on the issue of at large
> elections.
> > > I
> > > > : > can imagine ways of organizing a shrunken ICANN where elections
> really
> > > > are
> > > > : > not needed, or other systems of electing a board would be ok.  The
> > > > details
> > > > : > are everything.   But the idea that elections are not feasible or
> > > don't
> > > > : > produce good board members isn't true empirically, either for
> ICANN or
> > > > the
> > > > : > CIRA.
> > > > :
> > > > : You mixed up 4 different things; I'll just address one: the
> empirical
> > > > : evidence from the ICANN elections is very strong that they are
> simply
> > > > : not feasible, and that is well documented -- eg, the method of voter
> > > > : identification (physical mail) simply didn't work (there was a huge
> > > > : amount of returned mail from China, for example).
> > > >
> > > >     Well, ICANN's own study said the elections were feasiable, as
> pointed
> > > > out by Adam.     The proposal was to use domain name registrations for
> > > voter
> > > > registration, and why won't that work?
> > > >
> > > >     Also, who on ICANN staff works on the at-large.org web site and
> the
> > > > at-large.org activities?
> > > >
> > > > --------------------------------
> > > > James Love mailto:james.love@cptech.org
> > > > http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Discuss mailing list
> > > > Discuss@icann-ncc.org
> > > > http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Discuss mailing list
> > > Discuss@icann-ncc.org
> > > http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> > Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
> > Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> >

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de