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

Re: [AMM 23.10.2000] short report on meeting with esther dyson

> it to me - was not very much able to adress officially; also because she
> had no real legitimation, she was not voted by anyone and so she suspected
> me to be in a much better situation, cause I was elected and might even
> say, what I think. Which is something new at ICANN.
> What she didn´t said and I can only guess is that the representatives of
> the governments (in and outside the GAC) don´t see this problem of
> legitimation for themself.  So, in her words, the basis for anything to do
> actively within ICANN has been very thin. That might be true in my eyes,
> but not very much when this shall mean "we have never been making great
> decisions". We argued a little bit about the possibilities of claiming the
> name space as a public space in policies (for ccTLD etc.), what she said is
> that the ICANN board never wanted to get any trouble with any of the
> countries so they never did try to do anything in this direction.
> Also, it would not be the ICANN board in general, but the representatives
> of the GAC that don´t wan´t ICANN to be transparent or open for anything
> the users want, cause the government claim to be the official
> representatives of the citizens of this planet. Well, what a bullshit.

Das faellt ja leider auf Dich selbst zurueck. Masslose
Selbstueberschaetzung, wuerd ich das nennen.

Wieso fuehltst Du Dich "legitimierter" als das US Government ?

"Demokratie ist lustig" a la Beuys ist hier fehl am Platz. Die Frage, wie
gross der Namespace ist, wie viele Domains es geben soll usw., geht ICANN
genau nichts an.