As a bit of a politics junkie myself, I have to say I disagree with the learned Professor Mueller's metaphor. <div><br><div>It is arguable that the US Capitol building is not home to one of the world's "first democracies"; however, for arguments sake, lets say it is...</div>
<div><br></div><div>The question should be framed as follows, "if the Capitol building collapses due to incompetent construction, and<i> </i>in the aftermath<i>, the opportunity</i> presents itself to re-think the nature of democracy, then should we? And if so, then what changes should we bring about?"</div>
<div><br></div><div>The same should apply to ICANN and what is going on now. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Mark R. Leiser</div><div><div>Phd Student</div><div>School of Law</div><div>Humanities & Social Sciences Faculty</div>
<div>Room 709, Level 7,</div><div>Graham Hills Building</div><div>50 George St, G1 1QE</div><div>University of Strathclyde</div><div>Glasgow, Scotland.</div><div>Email: <a href="mailto:mark.leiser@gmail.com">mark.leiser@gmail.com</a> </div>
<div>Phone: +447825777686</div><div><br></div><div>The University of Strathclyde is a Charitable Body, Registered in Scotland, Number SCO15263</div></div><div><div><br><br></div><br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 2:38 PM, William Drake <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch" target="_blank">william.drake@uzh.ch</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi Carlos<br>
<br>
Neither of us is saying it's not a big mess that won't have to be cleaned up. Just that it's not obvious it requires a new round of organizational reinvention navel gazing at this particular juncture.<br>
<br>
But I'm glad you think do anything merrily!<br>
<br>
BD<br>
<br>
PS: Please, Milton is not a political scientist, he just plays one. We like states (not of nature). He's actually a former art student gone bad, i.e. degree in communication.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Apr 21, 2012, at 2:25 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:<br>
<br>
> Wow, Milton, this is really amazing. This is not a simple<br>
> "implementation mistake". This involved serious breach of privacy of<br>
> expensive applications which are part of investment strategies by<br>
> business organizations in most cases. There is an obvious liability<br>
> issue here involved. It cannot be dismissed as just "a computer form<br>
> that did not work as expected", and cannot be left in the hands of the<br>
> same staff which caused the problem. And you are not a computer<br>
> scientist, you are a political scientist as far as I recall, which<br>
> surprises me even more.<br>
><br>
> And Bill Drake merrily embarks on the dismissing argument, what is going<br>
> on with you people? :(<br>
><br>
> --c.a.<br>
><br>
> On 04/21/2012 03:54 AM, William Drake wrote:<br>
>> I agree. The governance model has issues, but this is a separate<br>
>> matter. We've just gone through the whole GNSO restructuring,<br>
>> ramping up the AoC process, etc. ICANN doesn't need and probably<br>
>> couldn't handle another extended bout of navel-gazing debate about<br>
>> reinvention right now. It needs to let the dust settle for awhile,<br>
>> get new leadership in place, get new gTLDs up and running, sort out<br>
>> IANA, advance the "internationalization" and outreach efforts, etc.<br>
>> Plenty on the plate already.<br>
>><br>
>> I can't imagine that the business folks that are laying out big cash<br>
>> and maneuvering around new names aren't already screaming about the<br>
>> screw up, or that the management won't be compelled to explain what<br>
>> happened and assure everyone it hasn't skewed the application process<br>
>> for/against anyone. If there's going to a joint request for info<br>
>> from SO/AC chairs or whatever, fine, but it's not obvious to me NCSG<br>
>> needs to spend a bunch of cycles on this unless folks are looking for<br>
>> something to do.<br>
>><br>
>> Bill<br>
>><br>
>> On Apr 19, 2012, at 3:45 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> I am not sure I agree with the premise that an implementation<br>
>>> mistake by the staff constitutes grounds for completely reinventing<br>
>>> and rethinking ICANN. Can someone explain the logic of that to me?<br>
>>> For example, if the Capitol building of one of the world's first<br>
>>> democracies, e.g., the USA, had collapsed due to incompetent<br>
>>> construction, would it mean that we should re-think the nature of<br>
>>> democracy?<br>
>>><br>
>>> I think they need to fix the mistake, fire those responsible, and<br>
>>> move on.<br>
>>><br>
>>> The root of the problem, to my mind, is not the governance model<br>
>>> but, in this order: a) management problems; b) the rube<br>
>>> Goldberg-like complexity of the new TLD program, and c) the more<br>
>>> than a decade-long delay in accepting a policy, which means that we<br>
>>> are dealing with a sudden flood of 1000+ applications rather than a<br>
>>> steady trickle of 10 or so a year, and which, like b), is a product<br>
>>> of the intense politics swirling around the program.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Remember that this has never been done before.<br>
>>><br>
>>>> -----Original Message-----<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> ICANN needs to rethink and reorganize itself!<br>
>>>><br>
>><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>