[ncdnhc-discuss] One observation on the so-called "ICANN reform" proposal

[Chun Eung Hwi]

One observation on the so-called "ICANN reform" proposal


1.	His proposal is based on the complete denial of "bottom-up
process", which has been the central principle of ICANN. It looks very
ironical for this document to take on the form of proposal for discussion.
Basically, his proposal lacks the willingness of hearing people's opinion
in this community.

2.	His proposal is based on the complete denial of all time and
energy committed for making most constructive suggestions and discussions
in ICANN. His proposal is itself a representative example case to make
ICANN process less efficient because it even completely ignores what ALSC
had done to now, for which Board allocated a significant amount of
financial resources and personnels although its output is also being
challenged. However, rather, Lynn says the very strange argument that
democratic bottom-up process has made ICANN inefficient.

3.	One of major reasons that Lynn takes for justifying to suggest the
creation of new structure is the reality that those important stake
holders' involvement is decreasing and accordingly the fund contribution
is decreasing as well. But this resulted from the unilateral way of
working of ICANN particularly reinforced since the last decision of new
gTLDs, but not from the complexity and overhead of bottom-up process. As
he admitted it, a substantial number of stake holders are recognizing
ICANN and approaching to a status of agreement even though there still
remain some differences. We could not expect the stable operation of DNS
when ICANN headquarter charges the process itself as an inefficient and
unworthy one because they could not make an mutually acceptable agreement
with other stake holders and could not reach a wishful conclusion in their
mind. 

4.	In suggesting the creation of new structure by discarding ICANN -
His proposal is in any aspect not a proposal for ICANN reform. Rather it
suggests the fundamentally different organizing principles as White Paper
had done so. - he explains the reason of change for conducting the core
functions rather than discussing everything and he also says that ICANN
could not work without much more fund, but the present structure of ICANN
doesn't secure the possibility. But why so much more fund is needed in
conducting simply the key functions?  In fact, throughout his accounts, he
reveals his argument that ICANN should expand its scope of regulation much
more and so it requires more funds, and to do such more works without any
interruption, all democratic process should be abolished.

5.	As a whole, in my eyes, Lynn seems to say that Ira Magaziner's
Liberal version of ICANN should be replaced with government initiated
Republican version of ICANN. Moreover, he looks to say that the U.S. had
already decided to seek only efficiency rather than getting global
bottom-up consensus since September 11th, therefore whether to follow up
it or not completely depends on you. No more discussion about it! And
governments should be lined up with the U.S. leading direction.
Definitely, in this way, we are witnessing the instability of Internet
drifting from this direction to another. 


Chun Eung Hwi
------------------------------------------------------------
Chun Eung Hwi
General Secretary, PeaceNet | phone:     (+82) 2- 2062-1302
Seoul Yangchun P.O.Box 81   |   pcs:     (+82) 019-259-2667 
Seoul, 158-600, Korea       | eMail:   ehchun at peacenet.or.kr   
------------------------------------------------------------