Re: Engineers, principles and practice (Re: [icann-eu] Draft commentson Study Committee)

[Marc Schneiders <marc@schneiders.org>]

On Fri, 24 Nov 2000, at 15:51 [=GMT+0100], Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> At 15:26 24/11/2000 +0100, Marc Schneiders wrote:
[in reply to what Harald Alvestrand wrote earlier:]
> > > I do not agree - I think a wider participation is good, and the number of
> > > people who care enough to get informed is not small.
> >
> >I sense some 'leave-it-to-the-engineers' here. I am too sensitive
> >probably. Ideas about political 'systems' are functioning below
> >surface all the time in these discussions. I find this confusing at
> >times, especially when practical aspects and principles of internet
> >politics are mixed.
> 
> Some things don't work for technical reasons.
> The role of "engineers" in politics is to point out those situations.
> 
> Personally, I want to contribute to BOTH the discussion of what things 
> should be and the discussion of what things are possible. So do most people 
> of an engineering background, I think.

So do I. It was not clever of me to only mention engineers, who
usually have no or certainly less other interests than some other
parties involved.

I wasn't focussing on this, however, but did not make myself clear.
Please, let me try again. 

I was and am having problems with your "people who care enough to get
informed". I can vote (and do so) for parliamentary elections, whether
I am informed or willing to be informed or not at all. Democracy
cannot function if *all* people refuse to be informed. Most
participants in elections, however, are not informed about even the
most important issues. That is, in my view, one of the reasons why
direct democracy (with a lot of referenda) is not a good idea at all.
I prefer to elect as delegates people in whose opinions I recognize my
own, let them run the shop, and get back to us every couple of years
for confirmation of their mandate. This is how it works somewhat,
however imperfectly, in my country, I like to think, and in Europe
generally (and perhaps elsewhere, I do not know). This is what I would
like to see on the internet as well, in a much more limited way,
naturally.

Many issues are too complex for most people/users. This does not mean
they should be left to the few who understand.

> It is when people who do not understand the technology misrepresent 
> technology, suggest things that will not work, or things that will cause 
> active damage, that the engineers have a reason to want to be listened to 
> more than others when they say "no". Not otherwise.
> 
> But it is very hard to remember when you are acting in what role.

I am convinced you do fine in both.

-- 
Marc Schneiders (rest in header)