[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] Future



My comments below:
*****[bracketed and starred]*****

----- Original Message -----
From: Vittorio Bertola <vb@bertola.eu.org>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Cc: <atlarge-panel@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 9:54 AM
Subject: [atlarge-panel] Future


Dear all,

I am sure that the At Large has to be a coalition of many different
independent groups;

*****[ That is exactly my point. We are NOT "the" At Large... We are "one"
expression of user interest, among "many"... Therefore the big game is the
construction of a coalition that will confront ICANN ]*****

and most of us here, including myself, would be
able to start an At Large organization on their own, to put up a
website with their hands, to start discussion lists and forums, and to
get a good number of members in a few weeks.

*****[ Exactly so - this should be the goal... creating enough populist
common ground on matters of Internet freedom and governance - couple the two
because they are linked - to motivate the sprouting up of At Large groups
all over the globe, which can congregate as a multiplicity around some
common focal point / website / umbrella... we should encourage multiplicity,
but we should be strategic and create a "rallying point" for a whole range
of User Groups. ]*****

(snip...)

Now, what is unbelievable to me is that most of the few resources and
energies we have are wasted in ego clashes and process discussions, so
that we can't actually achieve anything; and that a good number of us
put their own vision and agenda above anything else.

*****[ This is human nature, and this is OK, and this is exactly why we
should encourage multiplicity, but also seek to create a credible umbrella
for hundreds of At Large / User groups ]*****

I have been re-elected Chair (mostly for desperation, I suppose) two
weeks ago.

*****[ No, you were regarded as generally fair in your role as Chairman the
first time round, and it is a compliment to you that people trust you again,
Vittorio. I do not agree with some of your views, but I believe you
genuinely try to act as a facilitator.]*****

As my first actions, I have tried to get our website
updated (as it is still inviting people to join the Shanghai
meeting...)

*****[ This is laughable and pathetic! I run over 100 websites and even my
young daughter runs her own site and keeps it up to date, and she's just a
schoolkid. The failure to plan out the structure and day-to-day management
of our website is a calamity, and there's no excuse for it. As a panel
member, I share the blame as much as anyone else. For goodness sake, how can
we have a website running a month out of date with (as yet) no plan for how
the website should be structured and developed?]*****


and to find two persons who would take responsibility for
leading work on the website and on the bylaws. Up to now, I could not
find any. Even if I wanted to do it myself (and I don't want, for the
reason I mentioned above) I don't even have the passwords to access
our own website - neither the .org, nor the .com.

*****[ Reality check here, Vittorio : .com has gone and Joop has formally
notified us that the website has brached off. That is his prerogative,
whether we like it or not, because he is the registrant of the domain. He
has the authority to do it. As for the .org : who specifically has the
password to access the .org website? This has to be clarified
immediately. ]*****

Moreover, I once had passwords to check the full membership list on
the .com site, but apparently Joop has changed them, so I must confess
that the Chair and the panel don't even have the full membership roll
for this organization (I have a copy made in September, perhaps
someone else has a newer one, I will check).

*****[ Second reality check : the membership will probably continue to grow
through Joop's offshoot (which at present is a website with no democratic
mandate). 1000+ Google hits lead people to Joop's offshoot. None lead people
to .org. Furthermore, Joop may retain many of those 1000 members whether we
like it or not. How many will take the trouble to ask to be removed? Very
few. Even if people condemn this, its a de facto reality. ]*****

So, there are a number of options in front of us.

*****[ I reject both the options you propose, Vittorio - I'm sorry! ]*****

If there are at least a few people who, together with me, want to
continue this effort, we can actually start to do some work, provided
that Joop gives us an updated membership list, and Bret gives us the
passwords to access the icannatlarge.org site. But we need to have a
group of people who want to cooperate and share the same goal, not to
stay there just to keep "a feet in two shoes".

In this first case, there are two sub-options:

*****[ No! There are many more than the 2 Icann-centric options you propose,
Vittorio! ]*****


 the first is that we
continue aiming to become a global At Large organization, that will
later decide whether and how to register as an At Large Structure and
participate in ICANN's ALAC.

*****[ Our goal should NOT be to participate in Icann's ALAC, but rather our
goal should be to form a global network and coalition of User Groups which
find their meeting point and coherence, not in Icann's ALAC, but as a strong
and independent netwide worldwide coalition of Users and Ordinary People.
Our goal should not be to shore up Icann's travesty and perpetuate ICANN's
agenda. Our goal should be to establish ourselves as a worldwide network and
coalition of Users OUTSIDE Icann, arguing the case for Internet Freedom and
User Participation from a growing position of strength. ALAC diminishes what
we should be trying to do, and places us in a position of weakness. We must
NOT legitimise the processes which have come about as the result of the
EXPULSION of fairly-elected representation for ordinary users. The very most
I think we should do is to send "observers" along the lines of Sotiris, who
are sceptical and critical and condemnatory. ]*****


The second is that we become the informal
seed of the Regional At Large Organizations required in the new ICANN
picture, splitting into smaller "constituent" working groups in each
continent, so to ensure that they will be open and bottom-up. This
might be a more achievable target, and might help in reducing
conflicts.


*****[ Sorry, but NO, NO, NO !!! The RALOs are Icann's attempt to HI-JACK
the At Large movement and bring it under the control of its own At Large
umbrella... If we oppose the RALOs we can take the initiative and build up
truly independent voices worldwide, region by region, country by country...
not as part of Icann's 'fake' organisation, but as part of the Human Race.
By all means let us develop bottom up and create an At Large structure like
bolivia.atlarge.org or germany.atlarge.org etc etc - as has been repeatedly
proposed. But we do this as ourselves, NOT as part of ICANN's attempts to
control, contain and stifle the At Large movement! The world is so big, that
Icann cannot possibly control or contain us, if we develop regionally, and
nationally, outside of Icann - their only hope to contain the "threat" of
Users and Democracy is to keep the At Large movement somehow INSIDE Icann...
that is exactly what the ALAC and the RALOs attempt to do... I say, no, we
believe that the Users of the world are NOT answerable to a corrupt board of
a few industry insiders whose track record includes the dismantlement of the
democratic At Large process... look at their track record... and don't
legitimise them... create the TRUE At Large instead... we can do it... I
renew my call for the creation of a structure which will devolve control of
local At Large's to local groups, and will devolve sections of a website to
local groups... as Bruce as pointed out, this is vital for outreach... THIS
should be our plan and our project, not trying to 'reason' with Icann, who
just change the rules as they go along, to marginalise the vital User
Community. If we have got distracted, it is in trying to accommodate Icann's
own agenda, when we should have been busy building our own. No to Icann's
RALOs. We are our own movement and we construct our own regional/national
multiplicities independent of Icann. ]*****

But if there are no other people who want to continue this effort, we
can stop here and be happy with the results we already achieved.

*****[ Happy with the results so far!!! 12 months ago: prospect of 8 or 9
elected At Large Board Members. Now: a small fraction - easily outvoted by
the industry placemen - on a nominating committee... and no clear guarantees
about that because Icann's track record is to change the rules or ignore
their own promises if it suits them. This is not a "happy result" - this is
an ignominious defeat for democracy and ordinary people. Remember: the
Internet belongs to all of us, all of us who devote years of our lives to
websites, people who educate through it, people who strive for minorities
through it, people who communicate with loved ones through it, people who
trade through it. It si the resource of the whole world, which - in a
dangerous era - can help bring us closer. Icann is a small clique trying to
hold it to ransom, and has acted AGAINST democracy in its own ranks. They
have EXPELLED fairly-elected people from future participation in their
Board, and now offer a sidelined ghetto for a few people, until it suits
them to change the rules again. I am not "happy" with this result. We should
NOT legitimise it. We should organise and mobilise to construct a REAL at
large in OPPOSITION - a worldwide movement that talks to the media, and
which achieves numerical 'authority' through alliance and coalition. ]*****

When
we started in March, there was absolutely no At Large on the ICANN
picture,

*****[There was no At Large on the ICANN picture, because Icann had booted
the At Large out of the picture. They EXPELLED us, they aborted the process
of democratization, and you think you can "do business" as normal with these
people? Please listen now: "THEY CANNOT BE TRUSTED". ]*****


 while, thanks to the efforts of a few people, but also to the
simple existence of this organization, now at least we have an At
Large council which will elect 1/4 of the Nominating Committee,

*****[ That's no use, it just gets outvoted or they change the rules
again... it's a sop to the DoC to make it appear that Users are being
"involved" when actually democracy has been overturned and the At Large has
been booted off the Board. ]*****


nominate liaisons to the Board and GNSO Council,


*****[ Oh great! I'm so happy! Hundreds of millions of Internet Users - in
other words almost everyone - is going to be granted "liaisons"... um...
power? ... NIL .... um ability to vote... NIL... "liaisons" means nothing...
"liaisons" means, good, now the USG can claim that their puppet ICANN is
addressing the need for User Representation... actual power for users...
NIL. This whole "liaison" thing achieves for us: NIL. It's a sham. It is
nothing. ]*****


and will be formed
for 2/3 by people elected from the bottom. It's not our dream, but
it's much more than what we had eight months ago.

So it's up to you, folks. Please speak. Particularly, I would like to
understand how many of the other panelists are still willing to work
for this organization and to devote some real amount of time to it.


*****[ I am interested in working for the creation of an Independent At
Large coalition including this organisation, which does well by exploring
and demonstrating democratic representation in its processes. I am
simultaneously exploring the idea of an "umbrella" and "rallying point" for
a multiplicity of groups who share concerns about Internet Freedom and
Internet Governance. It would be great if this organisation chooses to take
the lead in the promotion of this umbrella. If it prefers not to, then so be
it. Others will just move on without it. The Regional organisation of the At
Large is going to proceed OUTSIDE the ICANN RALOs. That is my total
conviction. I am happy to contact and invite every single person on our
membership e-mail list to participate in such a regional initiative, and let
them choose and decide for themselves. Obviously I would be happy if
IcannatLarge.org or IcannatLarge.com or WorldatLarge.org or AtLarge.org
contacted any and all of these people (along with hundreds of kindred
organisations). As far as I'm concerned, anything's fair game, as long as
individuals themselves get to choose what they want to be involved in. Yes,
Vittorio, I am willing to work for this organisation, or for several
organisations. It is outcomes that matter, and I have little interest in an
Icann-centric outcome. So willingness to participate, and the motivation to
participate, depends very much on what this group is about - we have still
so far not defined that clearly. What I expect is that IcannatLarge.org will
become a small group trying to work with the ICANN ALAC and RALOs scam, and
that other independent initiatives will overtake it and supercede it. I
genuinely expect that to happen. And I am more than happy to travel on with
the new groups. Why wouldn't I? I'm happy to belong to scores of groups if
necessary. In terms of channelling time and energy, it's obvious that I or
anyone else will channel our time and energy into the orgs which most
closely pursue the goals and convictions we hold. We may diverge, we may
unite, but we share a number of key central beliefs : we believe ordinary
users should be decisively represented in the running of the Internet; we
believe that Internet Freedom is threatened if the future of the Internet is
handed over lock, stock and barrel to powerful vested interests. The stake
are too high to be "nice" about this. Either IcannatLarge.org works, or
something else takes over instead. At present we can't even run and update
our website, something my 12 year old could do. And we're STILL talking
about ALAC and the RALOs as if they're in some way legitimate. Sorry, but
people will just say "Bye"... ]*****


(In the meantime, I'm asking Joop to disclose the membership list and
change the name and look and feel of his site, so that there can't be
confusion.)


*****[ Or should WE change the look and feel of OUR site? ... and meanwhile,
please could Bruce and I be given a mandate to develop www.atlarge.org as an
umbrella both for ourselves and also for other fellow travellers, so we can
all congregate, and construct our own "ralos" outside Icann ... now THAT
would be a site worth making... THAT is the site that would really threaten
Icann... ]*****
--
vb.            [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<---


*****[ Lastly Vittorio, can I thank you for your time and commitment to a
good and noble cause. You see, we can be different and diverse, and we are a
multiplicity, not something uniform and controlled top-down. I like the idea
of an At Large Coalition which has good people like Vittorio following his
star, and others following theirs, but all believing in the defence and
protection of the Internet in the name of the people. ]*****




-------------------> http://bertola.eu.org/ <-----------------------

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




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