[atlarge-discuss] Candidate Statement from Richard Henderson

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

HelpI am a 49-year-old schoolteacher and novelist, married with three young children (photo here: http://www.theInternetChallenge.com/richardhenderson.htm 

I believe the Internet is a world resource which should be administered primarily by the millions of ordinary people who use it, develop it, and communicate through it. 

I regard ICANN as consciously corrupt. I think its leadership is a self-serving self-perpetuating clique, intent on holding onto power and privilege, and detemined to stifle critical viewpoints on the Board. To this end it has rejected the concept of democratic representation of ordinary users and its AtLarge initiative is a sham, designed to ward off criticism without granting any decision-making powers. 

My scepticism over ICANN arises from an extremely close analysis of the way the NewTLDs were created and administered. Along with Professor Robert Connor, I brought the .info sunrise fiasco to world attention, demonstrating the participation of Afilias directors and executives in fraudulent activity, and the abuse of ICANN-agreed processes by rogue registrars. 

I was shocked and disillusioned when ICANN failed to intervene, presided over the corruption, and continued to accredit and promote registrars who had been shown to have acted fraudulently (submitting false Trademark data to secure names etc). My contempt for ICANN was compounded after the .biz2B which revealed the continuing abuse of process by accredited registrars, involving warehousing of names for themselves, their business partners, or friends, and acting to the exclusion of the general public. 

In early April I warned Afilias and ICANN that these abuses would recur in the .info LR2, and I raised 14 questions of serious concern with Dan Halloran, the ICANN registrars liaison executive. 70 days have passed, he has failed even to acknowledge my mail (or repeated copies), my predictions about .info LR2 have come to pass, and ordinary users have lost out as a result. 

It is a wholly unacceptable way to administer a worldwide resource. 

This lack of openness and accountability convinces me that the ICANN leadership should be removed, and that the fair administration of the DNS should be safeguarded by democratic representation of the millions of internet users worldwide. 

I therefore take the view that our organisation must remain independent of ICANN, and should only participate in ICANN-AtLarge window-dressing to the extent that ICANN allows user-groups to organise the AtLarge initiative themselves. The proposed ALAC should be democratically elected and led, or we should not take part at all. On the contrary, we should set ourselves up as the official worldwide opposition group - demanding democratic representation for millions of users at all levels of the ICANN organisation. 

To this end, I propose a broad-based user movement, dealing at arm's length with ICANN, but not limited to ICANN. Outreach should become the single most important issue after these elections, and we should aim to have 100,000 members by the next elections in a year's time. This is a realistic goal. It is the principle upon which I stand for election, and I would expect to be elected out if we have not achieved this by next year. 

Our organisation has a moral authority which is recognised in many quarters. Many agree that the users of this worldwide resource - the Internet - should take ownership and participate fully in its administration and development. It is a high ideal. To have real effect, however, we need to make our case from a position of real numerical strength. Only creating a movement on this scale will really force the attention of politicians and media, and pressure ICANN to concede ground. 

To try instead, as some have, to 'reason' with ICANN, and compromise for the sake of involvement on their own initiative (which offers no power and is a sham to pretend they are taking AtLarge seriously) : this, in my opinion, plays into their hands and limits our credibility while enhancing theirs. It is exactly what they want us to do. 

The decisions taken about who to elect to our executive will therefore significantly determine the direction we take and the kind of organisation we become. 

There are decent candidates who want us to 'let go' a little democracy in the short term, so we can play our part in ICANN's powerless AtLarge. While I respect these candidates as individuals, I believe they are playing into ICANN's hands, and I urgently appeal to voters to elect an executive which will more robustly challenge ICANN, and take a clearcut hostile line to the ICANN leadership and its anti-democratic 'reforms'. 

I therefore urge anyone who shares my vision to consider voting not only for me but also for candidates like Jamie Love and Joanna Lane (and others- Vivek & Bruce & Sotiris & Judith & plenty more - read their comments) because we need to ensure an executive majority set on these principles, so that we set our course for the future with an exciting vision and a real chance to create change "on our terms" and with "our own agenda". 

Thank you if you have managed to read through to the end of this statement. My previous statement in the last election (when I was grateful to be elected with third highest votes) can be found here: 
http://www.icannatlarge.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=149 
But my real concern is that a majority of the 11-person executive share a similar vision of where we need to go and what we need to be. 

So if you vote for me individually, please, respectfully, consider voting for a group who would keep this organisation on course: 

I endorse: 

Jamie Love 
Joanna Lane 
Vivek Durai 
Bruce Young 
Sotiris Sotiropolis 
Judith Oppenheimer 

but not to the exclusion of others like Eric and David F if they choose to stand, or many others who have contributed and participated on the forum and the mailing-list. 

You'll have your own views and choices anyway! 

Kind regards 

Richard Henderson