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

[ICANN-EU] Re: =??B?SGVsbG8sIHRvIGFueW9uZSB3aG8gZG9uJ3Qga25vd3MgbWUhIFtzcGVha2xvdzAxYjoxNzZd=?=

Dear Roland,
You responded a very old post! Means you thought a lot about your
response. I will try to address the challenge.
 
Agreed we have to be in the ICANN, as a life-guard system if you want.
The points are simple when you consider them:

-  Internet belongs to all by nature

-  it is mainly serviced by organization leads by the ICANN (there are
   others like the ORSC, or prevented to join the ICANN like IDNO)

-  there are cons and pros for this organization to stay dominant. The main
   con is the current policy of the ICANN which is

   -  strictly against its by laws (they spell out that the ICANN cannot be
      a registry/registrar, must treat every one equal and favor competition:
      ie exactly what they do not do with the gTLD program).

   -  unable to control internal lobbying (example the denial of DNSO/NC
      to implement the WG demanded by the BoD)

   -  wanting to conduct its own policy instead of researching and
      administrating a consensus (as per its charter) for international
      domain names, a-root, TLDs, ccTLDs ..

-  another danger is the @large constituency organization which will
   be submitted to the contradictory forces the election shown, and
   will necessarily remain an internal body of the ICANN (its end-user
  alibi).

This is why I am advocating an @wide constituency for an "active
democracy" and an efficient coopetition.

-  @wide : means the kind of global interest groups initiated during
   the @large campaign which will need to restrict itself to ICANN.
   Andy M-M shown it immediately: restricting the icann-europe ML
   to being the seed of the european @large organisation as desired
   by Thomas Roessler and starting his own "@wide" ML
   icann-debate@ccc.de and news distribution list.

-  active democracy : any one active because of his interests,
   competences, needs, rights, etc... may participate

-  coopetition : Internet is a common tool. ICANN should be - its
   charter - the secretariat of the consensus for its management. There is
   no governance involved but an objective interest from competitive
   corporations, interests, social groups, countries, etc...  that the whole
   thing works. So everyone must share and be allowed to share.

As usual it boils down to "subsidiarity", ie "why would you do for me
something I can to do by myself"?

As long as ICANN respects my rights, 'long live to the ICANN', as I
think there is a real need for it, if it respects its charter.
If ICANN endangers my rights (as it does today) I will fight for them.
Jefsey


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICANN the "50.000 bucks + 101 bugs = Error 50101" consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------   


At 10:10 12/10/00, you wrote:

  작성자   : coach [ ladmin ] 조회: 0, 줄수: 113, 분류: Etc.
Hello, to anyone who don't knows me!
To: "Constantine S. Chassapis" <cschassapis@acm.org>, <icann-candidates@egroups.com>, "Jefsey Morfin" <jefsey@online.fr>
From: "coach" <roland.portig@sonnet.de> 
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:19:28 +0200
Subject: Re: [ICANN-EU] Re: [icann-candidates] Hello, to anyone who don't knows me!
      


Jefsey, hi,
I underline what you say, but you or I or other candidates cannot succeed
when we are in fundamental opposition to what ICANN is today. We must go
into ICANN, and, like a life-guard system, keep it alive. It will not live
further on, if we and the later elected directors, post fundamental
different ideas from what ICANN is today. What most candidates do is answer
the question: what would I do if I am the king of ICANN. Can someone be the
king of ICANN? If yes, then the web will be like a rose without water.
Greetings
Roland
-----Urspr?gliche Nachricht-----
Von: "Jefsey Morfin" <jefsey@online.fr>
An: "Constantine S. Chassapis" <cschassapis@acm.org>;
<icann-candidates@egroups.com>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 27. August 2000 19:14
Betreff: Re: [ICANN-EU] Re: [icann-candidates] Hello, to anyone who don't
knows me!


> Dear Constantine,
> I like very much your positions and your dynamic involvement.
> Thanks for that. Just a word about age and politics, using
> Roland's example to show you that your good point is not from
> you age but from a fundamental understanding of what the
> Internet is.
>
> Roland, you take the image of the telephone and talk about the
> phone company. Please remember that on Internet *you* are
> the telephone company and that you deal with other telephone
> companies. Internet is *not* one network ruled by the ICANN,
> but an *interconnection* of different interests, technologies,
> speeds, user needs, development dynamics, innovation thirst,
> etc.. Independent networks the ICANN is supposed to help
> working together. True: if you use an ISP, you are in this ISP's
> network. But you probably have several ISPs, so you are by
> your own.
>
> The problem is that most of the people try to stick to a Telco
> service model when they think about Internet administration
> and operations. The model is international relations: ICANN
> could be considered as the Permanent Council of the UN. It
> has no more powers. Big politics (US, European governments,
> MS, ATT, WIPO, NSI, etc.) cannot give it any power, but
> they can dramatically use it to make their weight taken into
> account and *make believe* it has powers (one trick for that
> is this stay@large 'election').
>
> We can either organize ourselves to be another force, or we
> can shout and cry and forget about it, or we can work
> within these structures to push for what we want.
>
> I think (but I am old: I first introduced these concepts publicly
> back in 1981 and proposed in 1985 a full technical modelisation
> of the networks integrating ISO and TCP/IP) that at the present
> stage, the prevailing technical+political incompetence still gives
> us (fellow users) a a good chance to organize ourselves and
> preserve most of our autonomy. Protecting our liberties and
> imposing some kind of "active democracy" (those who wants
> to be active having equal access to the voting powers) will
> request to deal equal to equal with other international bodies
> and states. For this we must be organized: this is not the role
> of the ICANN; this is why I think about the I-Parliament initiative.
>
> Up to us to discuss with politics, or to let them speak for us.
> So you are right: people will win. But politics may strangle
> innovation in asserting their power till then. So better to deal
> with them rather than fighting them.
>
> Jefsey Morfin
> http://utel.net/jefsey.htm
>
>
> At 12:37 27/08/00, you wrote:
> >Dear Roland,
> >You wrote...
> > > you see the ICANN as I do. If you are phoning with your
> > > friend, you do not
> > > ask if the telephone company is structured democratic.
> > > What others think on
> > > political issues are only issues of the force behind ICANN,
> > > and to treat
> > > force must be a non political thing, or even we will get a
> > > web as a dull
> > > mirror of the world as it is.
> >
> >It is my strongest belief (maybe, because I am probably
> >younger than you sir) that the Internet, or any future form
> >of it, will be a so radically novel way for all of us for being
> >and creating, that the current politicians don't even start
> >realizing, even less trying or succeeding in controlling it.
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> icann-candidates-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
icann-candidates-unsubscribe@egroups.com


이전: Hello, to anyone who don't knows me!
다음: Fw: Respect, freedom, etc. 2000/10/12(17:10) from 211.108.216.227
CrazyWWWBoard 2000