Indeed, Jay, the values you identify are worth working for.
I agree with Roberto that labeling them as American is not a helpful
idea in the ocntext of the Interent, which is viewed around the world
with a certain suspician that is it controlled by the US and needs t0o
be wrsted from "American Control".
Also, I am not asure that fighting is the right choice of words, as I
tire of constantly seeing people turn situations requiring some good
old fachioned hard work into wars so the problems can be solved with a
good rousing war of some kind.
We do not need a war to resolve our difficulties with ICANN. Outr
problem with ICANN is that it is waging war to solve its problems, and
we need to wage cooperation collaboration strategies inplace of divide
and conquer tacktics.
Of course, it is always hard to stop a war once it starts. It only
takes one to start a war, but it always takes two or more in
cooperation to stop it. This is the basic nature of Zero Sum Gaming,
at which ICANN is a Master, whether they realize what they are doing
or not.
So, lets focus on common values and forget our nationalities. What we
are working for is not a national thing of any kind.
Cheers...\Stef
>From your message Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:55:12 -0400:
}
}
}Hi Roberto,
}
}I had a long exchange with some Netizens
}up in Canada about my call for *traditional*
}American values. They felt that it was not
}appropriate for me to hold our system of
}government up as the ideal for the rest of
}the world to follow, especially for the 75
}or so other countries that have democratic
}traditions.
}
}I couldn't agree more!
}
}In fact, the U.S. Government has been as
}guilty as *any* government in abandoning
}Netizens rights in this global power grab.
}
}That's why my call was for *traditional*
}values, the ones that helped define our
}common traditions, and the ones that have
}broken the chains of bondage that were
}common before the emergence of government
}for the people, and by the people.
}
}So my call for traditional American values
}was about just that -- values. Values like
}no taxation without representation, due process,
}protections of minority interests, etc. It was
}also to get the attention of the two presidential
}candidates that were cc:d on my original message.
}
}In closing, my comments were meant as an ideal
}to fight for. To the degree that the rest of
}the world agrees, I hope that they'll join us.
}
}Jay.
}
}P.S. I will rewrite the PDNHA pages to better
}reflect these sentiments. Thank you for your
}comments.
}
}
}At 06:39 AM 4/26/99 , Roberto Gaetano wrote:
}>> Finally, to facilitate representation
}>> for our clients, Iperdome has formed the
}>> Personal Domain Name Holders Association
}>> (http://www.pdnha.org). The PDNHA claims
}>> membership in the non-commercial domain
}>> name holders constituency, and any other
}>> Individual based constituency that may
}>> be considered.
}>>
}>What puzzles me most in PDNHA's approach (besides yet another unpronouceable
}>addition to the alphabet soup) is the following excerpt from the program
}>(see http://www.pdnha.org/about.html for reference):
}>
}> An American Perspective
}> As a Representative Democracy, U.S. citizens have come to expect
}>certain rights and civil liberties from our government. Unfortunately, this
}>unique American perspective has collided with the governance philosophies
}>found in the other 240+ countries throughout the world. Consequently, many
}>of our most closely held beliefs about governance have not been incorporated
}>into ICANN. Things like no taxation without representation, due process,
}>consent of the governed, etc.
}> The PDNHA will continue the fight for these truly American values,
}>not just for Americans, but for all Netizens of the world..
}>
}>First of all, many thanks to Jay Fenello on behalf of the other 240+
}>countries around the world, where rights and civil liberties cannot be
}>expected ;>).
}>
}>I have heard before the statement about fighting for American values on
}>behalf of the other peoples of the world, and even if often in good faith,
}>not many times with good results (Viet-Nam is the first example that comes
}>to my mind). I tend therefore to think at this attitude to fight on behalf
}>of others in spite of what the others think the best example of non-respect
}>of one of the primary civil rights and liberties, i.e. autodetermination.
}>
}>I surely think that Iperdome and PDNHA's point of view is very important,
}>and may be helpful in building up a truly complete scenario for the future
}>DNSO constituencies, but I doubt that a real claim for objectivity and
}>fairness can be made if the "American Perspective" approach is to be
}
}>privileged.
}>
}>Maybe this would be worth remembering when time will come to mediate among
}>the different proposals in Berlin.
}>
}>Roberto
}>
