Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: Recordings of Amsterdam Meetings and PROPOSAL

["J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>]

On 12:16 20/12/02, Alexander Svensson said:
> How much influence has IcannatLarge.org had until now? How
> has it achieved its (somewhat sloppily defined) goals?
> Is it the best way to influence domain name etc. policy
> development from a user perspective? Is a regional approach
> likely to be easier or more difficult to organize (think
> language, think communication, think time zones)? How
> do you get existing user groups to participate?
>
> These are the questions we have to discuss *before* we have
> the answer to the second question -- what IcannatLarge.org
> should do with regard to regional At Large organizing
Dear Alex,
I like it when the list become quiter and a serious dialog can develop. 
Your point are the good point. I would comment your dialog with Richard as 
follows.
- we want a male plug into ICANN of our own shape to get some real Internet 
power, but we have not decided it yet.
- ICANN has set-up a female plug and we are not happy with the design and 
the way it relates to quite no Internet power supply.

My understanding is that ICANN has no real Internet power and that if we 
organize we may have more. The cost and the effort is not nil but it is 
very low when we consider what is at stake. I do think that if instead of 
debating a few of us REALLY meant to take over the control of their 
Internet, it would not be that difficult.

- ICANN is probably 10 full time people
- USG is big but Nancy Victory is not 24/24 dedicated to Internet and her 
whole staff is probably mudded in bureaucracy a private commando would not 
have.
- the cost is probably no more than a few hours a week, 10 to 30 PCs (we 
are talking of $1500/month equivalent)
- the vision of the system they have has no architecture, no plan, no 
mutual agreement etc/ to work on such things would give a tremendous lead.

The real power is the number of users. You want an exemple? Take New.net. 
What ICANN reproaches to New.net is to be commercial, closed and final, ie 
an alternative. Take dot-root: a test as per ICP-3, non-profit, non final 
(if a project is a mistake it has a back-off built-in possibility), open to 
all and calling for public reporting. I do think that we can develop 
dot-root to test, advise, work together on an ICANN III we all may agree 
and that might wear the name of ITU-ICANN.

I do think we can do it. We only need to agree and cooperate. Today we are 
disbanded and with no real common practical objective. Let stop debating as 
parrots and let unite those who want as a team, with a clear and final aim 
"to set-up a users' real international and innovative network system".

jfc














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