Re: [atlarge-discuss] FYI: [CNET] ICANN under Twomey tocontinue policy focus

[espresso@e-scape.net]

At 17:44 -0800 2003/03/23, Jeff Williams wrote:
> Judyth makes some very good points here in her rather long winded
>and politically expedient comments/remarks below.  They should be
>strongly and properly considered in good faith.

Talk about praising with faint damns! ;-)

>  However, with respects to the UN charter on human rights, which
>is a now nearly worthless document as it is only occasionally
>upheld by it's present members, and hasn't been universally or
>even by a majority upheld for more than 13 years.

I beg to differ, Jeff ... unless you would argue that the
Ten Commandments are likewise worthless because so few people
have kept them during the past 5000 years, or that the
Gettysburg address should be thrown out because "government
of the people, by the people, for the people" is a democratic
ideal no actual nation has kept to 100%. The point of these
documents isn't that they are universally upheld but that
there is substantial agreement that they are ideals to work
towards.

>  Another rather odd but understandable inconceivable mix
>in Judyth's comments as she attempted to apply to this
>fledgling organization, is that clearly the fledgling organization
>is not yet even a true organization, and that human rights
>of any kind do not necessarily apply to organizations as they
>have no legally defined citizens as nation states do.  Indeed
>however some if not many of this fledgling organizations
>members are stakeholders/users and as such have the right to
>representation, as well as the responsibility.  We thus far
>have failed terribly to take that responsibility seriously if
>at all.  Until or unless we do, we effectively as a body of
>stakeholders/users cannot assert the rights to which Judyth
>is referring and be taken seriously.

"Odd but understandable inconceivable mix" is one of your
best lines so far, Jeff. I salute your talent for the absurd.

However, in a democracy, every individual is supposed to have
the same rights as every other individual: the wording may
vary from one nation or group to another but those rights
generally do include things like "life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness", freedom of expression and association,
etc. Indeed, rights and responsibilities go together: the
right to personal freedom entails the responsibility to
respect the same freedom of others; the right to vote entails
a responsibility to consider the issues and cast one's ballot.

Not all organizations are democracies. Those that are -- and
this would include most membership-based organizations -- may
or may not have the defense of members' human rights as a
primary goal, but they certainly aren't supposed to encourage
the violation of those rights.

This group is not yet an organization of any kind. It's a
voluntary gathering of equals from all over the world who
share the hope that it will become an organization - and
specifically an organization whose goal is the democratization
of Internet governance. I really don't think that can happen
if we are unwilling to democratize as well as organize
ourselves.

>  Therefore the "Regime" that needs changing or replacing is
>indeed ICANN in this context, and this organization must
>get it's act together to be able to cooperatively aid in
>effecting that Regime change, or face relative obscurity.

No dispute there. But I'd add that this group is now in
the process of its own "regime change" insofar as we will
soon be asked to nominate, and then vote for, some of our
number to sit on a new Interim Panel. We members are
hoping that the new Panel so elected will be able to help
us move from "amorphous group" to "collaborative group"
to "incorporated organization" and thence to a relevant
role in defending the rights of individual Internet users,
at least insofar as those rights are affected by ICANN
and other bodies which play a role in Internet governance.

Whatever the (many) flaws in the current ICANN regime, at
the moment the most pressing need is to develop our
means of working together towards a common goal. If we
ourselves are unwilling to deal with our rights and
responsibilities as members of a voluntary association,
I think obscurity would be preferable to the alternative.

Regards,

Judyth


##########################################################
Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
##########################################################
"A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
"Un mot suffit aux sages; pour les autres, il en faut plus."
##########################################################



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