At 07:33 AM 9/11/99 , Ellen Rony wrote:
>Dave Farber wrote:
>>
>> If ICANN fails it
>>will be taken as a indicator that the net can not manage itself and
>>we will get "Adult" supervision which believe me we will not like. We
>>must make it work.
>>
>
>Mr, Farber. There is room here for a different cause/effect analysis. I
>posit that if ICANN fails, it will be an indicator that the ICANN *model*
>was not workable, NOT that the Net cannot manage itself. The model that is
>the source of so much controversy is one that began with several insiders
>hand-picking a group of supposed DNS newbies who were, in turn, secretive,
>clueless and easily swayed.
Hi Dave,
I have to agree with Ellen.
In fact, your role as a member of ITAG, as someone
who was intimately involved in the secret, back room
deals that resulted in ICANN, makes your current
comments somewhat disingenuous.
I would like to continue to believe that you have
the best interest of the Internet at heart. But
when you complain about the blatant abuses of ICANN,
while you continue to support it because "ICANN is
the best of the alternatives available", you are
sealing our collective fate.
When you support an organization that ignores its own
rules to pursue an agenda, an organization that approves
rule changes *after* the fact to justify its actions, it
is only a matter of time before these same "procedures"
are used against you!
And when you consider that ICANN is still in its courtship
period pending the full transfer of authority from the U.S.
Government, just wait until after the honeymoon! Anyone
who thinks that ICANN will become more reasonable *after*
it has consolidated power had better study history.
IMHO & FWIW,
Jay.
>What litmus test would you apply to determine whether ICANN has failed?
>IMHO, ICANN is a failure, has been a failure since Day One, and will always
>be regarded as a failure and denied the respect it so desperately seeks
>because of its hubris, arrogance or ineptness, take your pick.
>
>ICANN failed as soon as it:
>
>- announced its "initial" board selected through a secret process that did
>not allow community input
>- promulgated its first bylaws which did not use the IFWP consensus points
>as a touchstone;
>- held its first closed board meeting;
>- focused on policymaking instead of establishing a membership and voting
>process;
>- established accreditation requirements for registrars that have policy
>implications for domain name registrants;
>- established a gerrymandered structure of constituencies;
>- denied individuals (arguably the largest constituency in the Internet
>community) any representation on the policy recommending body;
>- violated its own bylaws in the conduct of its activities;
>- used its unelected interim position to extend the terms of its members; and
>- allowed itself to be captured by a coalition of ISOC and IP interests.
>
>ICANN arrived on the DNS scene as a stillborn puppy. This is why your
>assertion that "we must make it work" falls on deaf ears. Sorry, but that
>dog won't hunt.
>
>............................................................................
>Ellen Rony ____ The Domain Name Handbook
>Co-author ^..^ )6 http://www.domainhandbook.com
>+1 (415) 435-5010 (oo) -^-- ISBN 0879305150
>Tiburon, CA W W [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> DOT COM is the Pig Latin of the Information Age
>............................................................................
>
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.� 770-392-9480
-----------------------------------------------
What's your .per(sm)? http://www.iperdome.com
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is
ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third,
it is accepted as self-evident." (Arthur Schopenhauer)
