Greg and all,
I think your assertion or belief is flawed. Let me tell you why. The
ICANN
"INitial" and Interim Board has been given every opportunity to come clean,
and has steadfastly either refused to do so or has remained silent
all together. The ICANN "Initial" and Interim Board, has been ask,
suggested
to a la Dave Farber and many others to conduct open and transparent
meetings, such as the upcoming one in Singapore, and again has refused
to do so for Esther Dysons own post earlier today. The ICANN has made
decisions that are in direct conflict with their own public statements on
several occasions, such as how the SELECTION of the membership
committee. We (INEGroup), through myself, on several phone conversations
have been flat told one thing and than they turn around and do another.
This is totally irresponsible, improper, disingenuous, and frankly in VERY
bad judgment.
ALso on the phone today I spoke with Roeland Mayer in one conversation,
with respect to the formation of DNSO.NET and the actions of the ICANN
"Initial" and Interim Board in the formation and closed dealings with
DNSO.ORG through Mike Roberts, and Joe Simms. We didn't agree
on everything that we spoke about, as I am sure that Roeland will
be happy to confirm, but we did agree that the ICANN "Initial" and
Interim Board is not conducting itself in a manner that is either to their
own advantage for the long haul, and is likely to increase the feeling of
distrust more than it has done thus far.
So, in conclusion, form the tenor of remarks and other channel
conversations
both from within our organization, and outside, the ICANN "Initial" and
Interim
Board does not have the confidence to adequately formulate a set of
reasonable bylaws or continue to attempt to structure the ICANN of the
future to the extent that the NTIA should do turnover. It is time for
them,
the ICANN "Initial" and Interim Board to step down or make some draconian
changes in their approach and attitudes VERY quickly. The latter, I am
afraid is highly unlikely however.....
Greg Skinner wrote:
> "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >At 05:26 PM 1/12/99 -0800, Greg Skinner wrote:
> >>Since the ICANN is (supposedly) an interim board, shouldn't we
> >>(ie. folks on this list) be doing that anyway? So, what would all of
> >>you do if there was no ICANN? More specificially, what if the USG
> >>(and other governments) were to totally step back from the process,
> >>and say "ok, you win -- you get to self-govern. The only stipulation
> >>is that you get no protection from us if laws are broken. If you're
> >>hauled into court, it's up to you to provide your own defense, as you
> >>are in a sense creating your own rules."
> >What would you do?
>
> >They won't answer because they're hard at work building something
> >they hope will get recognized as the DNSO. *Thats my point*.
>
> OK, but I would assume then that they are following this process
> because they have some faith (or hope) that the process will yield
> better solutions than extant (or previous) processes. For example, I
> get this impression from Michael Sondow and Tom Lowenhaupt, who feel
> that the ICANN structure provides for input that would otherwise not
> be considered.
>
> Is this the DNSO's position?
>
> What I'm suggesting is that despite the fact that ICANN may have
> unclear origins, people are willing to go along with it because they
> believe it can work. So in a sense ICANN's legitimacy stems from the
> trust that people have placed in it.
>
> --gregbo
>
> __________________________________________________
> To receive the digest version instead, send a
> blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ___END____________________________________________
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
