[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] Joe Sims repsonds to criticism of Reform document
- To: "James Love" <email@example.com>, "Dave Crocker" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] Joe Sims repsonds to criticism of Reform document
- From: "todd glassey" <email@example.com>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 12:13:36 -0700
- Cc: "NCDNHC-discuss list" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "atlarge discuss list" <email@example.com>
- Delivered-To: mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org
- List-Help: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-Post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-Subscribe: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Mailing-List: contact email@example.com; run by ezmlm
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
David you are wrong. ICANN is in and of itself a critically political
organization and the reason it is so screwed up is because the techies-only
crowd wants to shutdown the political issues in favor of their vision of a
one-world mindeset. Unfortunately the only way they know how to do that is
to prevent anyone else's ideas or solutions from being talked about or
The net-net is that the Management of the Internet is screwed up today
because too many people believed the starry eyed techies when they got up
and preached one world, one way, their way...
The problem is that we are not one world today and wont be even tomorrow.
That's farther off still and until such times there are social and political
issues that MUST be factored into running this Internet. You may not like
this but until you, or anyone else in your camp can write the whole check
that's just the way it is.
With that said. It is critically important that we get a grip on what ICANN
is. A set of policies and processes for running a set of universal network
and name resolution services. The policies to date implement a management
board for running ICANN and we are finding that most of us are dissatisfied
with the events of late and where ICANN is, or is not going with itself.
Because of this, I think that ICANN does need politics, it also needs a
political process. And anyone's attempt to keep the people from managing
their IP's is in serious hot water.
Just my two cents.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Crocker" <email@example.com>
To: "James Love" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: "NCDNHC-discuss list" <email@example.com>; "atlarge discuss list"
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 6:23 AM
Subject: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] Joe Sims repsonds to
criticism of Reform document
> At 09:11 AM 6/1/2002 -0400, James Love wrote:
> >demonstrated to not command consensus support in the ICANN community."
> >Actually, the ICANN GA just voted 3 to 1 in favor of a motion I proposed
> >asking the DoC to rebid the ICANN contracts, so I'm not sure what his
> >is here.
> non-representative sampling leads to non-representative results. the GA
> non-representative of much having to do with the real world of ICANN.
> >Joe also says I have a discredited view that anything other than "direct
> >elections is unacceptable for world democracy." In Thursdays'
> >Post, Stuart Lynn characterised those asking for rebid of the DoC ICANN
> >contracts as a "group that is trying to transform ICANN from a limited
> >technical body into a worldwide experiment in global democracy," which is
> >funny, because the whole fight is how to actually have meaningful limits
> as has been pointed out to you quite a few times, it is folks like you --
> and not any ICANN staff or board -- who are constantly focusing on matters
> far beyond ICANN's scope. by emphasizing that larger scope, you make it
> apply to icann. hence, you -- not icann -- are increasing the scope, as
> Lynn stated.
> >and keep ICANN out of the politics or non-technical policy making.
> your contributions to icann discussions are nothing but political. in
> you make a point of dismissing all technical matters.
> > I
> >personally would be happy if ICANN was so reduced in power that one one
> >cared who was on the board of directors
> take a look at the actual level of public involvement in icann, compared
> with the scale of the total Internet population, and you will discover
> by any reasonable measure, no one really does care.
> Dave Crocker <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
> TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
> For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org