We *do* want to learn from history, and we do... But we have to float the
trial balloon - however flawed - to get the feedback. I answered a
reporter's questions, and got feedback. Seems to work!
Now I'm sorry, and I mean this respectuflly, but I don't consider it my duty
to post stuff to the Net before talking to Jeri Clausing, or anyone else.
It's pretty random (i.e. self-organizing).
On funding, as I mentioned, it's on our Website. And you're right: we're
overextended right now.
Esther
t 12:20 PM 07/02/99 -0500, Jay Fenello wrote:
>
>
>Hi Dave,
>
>The engagement of Ogilvy resulted in many complaints
>from the Internet community. Here is how I would
>categorize these complaints, in order of importance:
> 1) Going public *before* going to the Net
> 2) Where is ICANN getting its funding?
> 3) Discount arrangements with Ogilvy.
>Your comments only address item 3!
>
>The biggest problem is ICANN going public *before*
>their "plans" are even discussed with the Internet
>community. The most recent example of this was the
>trial balloon floated in the New York Times regarding
>a lottery for new registrars.
>
>Of course, a lottery is not a new idea. A few years
>back, the IAHC proposed something similar. And a few
>years back, the IAHC had to change their proposal after
>receiving many objections from the Internet community.
>
>Why would ICANN want to repeat a failed approach?
>Why *wouldn't* ICANN want to learn from history, or
>learn from those who were involved in that history?
>What is ICANN's fear of going to the Net *first* --
>what is the downside?
>
>The second most common complaint had to do with funding.
>Where is ICANN getting its funding? Who is paying their
>bills? What *are* their bills?
>
>All we have ever heard about funding is that GIP has
>given ICANN $130,000, most of which has come from IBM.
>
>That amount hardly covers the ICANN Board's travel
>expenses, let alone the IANA staff. How in the world
>are they going to pay for one of the most expensive
>PR firms in the world, even at cost!
>
>So while Esther may have an easy time agreeing with
>your comments, Dave, I would very much like to see
>Esther answer these other questions of substance.
>
>Respectfully,
>
>Jay Fenello
>President, Iperdome, Inc.
>404-943-0524 http://www.iperdome.com
>
>
>At 2/6/99, 06:18 PM, Dave Farber wrote:
>>Gordon,
>>
>>There is another view on the engagement of Ogilvy by ICANN. It is very
common for not for profits to be helped by PR firms for payment that covers
basically out of pocket expenses. I would assume that is the case with
ICANN. PR firms offer a lot of services NOT JUST spin doctoring things. They
often are very good at making sure the public knows what is going on via
press releases and briefings. Often NFP do not have the staff with the time
and energy to make sure that happens.
>>
>>I for one will give both Ogilbvy and ICANN the benefit of the doubt and
believe that they are in fact doing this to improve the communications to
the community and not to hide anything.
>>
>>I further assume that the ICANN Board and President will firmly insure
that there is no spin control on what comes out and that they tell the whole
truth and nothing but the truth.
>>
>>Esther, do you agree.
>>
>>Dave
>>
>
Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes!
chairman, EDventure Holdings
interim chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1 (212) 924-8800
1 (212) 924-0240 fax
104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
New York, NY 10011 USA
http://www.edventure.com
PC Forum: 21 to 24 March 1999, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
High-Tech Forum in Europe: 24 to 26 October 1999, Budapest
Book: "Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age"
