NCDNHC Waste of Time - Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform Seeks PublicSubmissions

[Derek Conant]

With this perspective, it seems that everything the NCDNHC involves
itself at this point is a waste of time.  Isn't the NCDNHC also
perceived as a failure?  How has the NCDNHC benefited the process?  

Derek Conant
DNSGA President and Chairman


Milton Mueller wrote:
> 
> Erick:
> Thanks for forwarding this, I think.
> 
> I would encourage NCDNHC members not to waste their
> time submitting comments to this particular process.
> The degree to which ICANN will be restructured is now
> in the hands of the US Government and wider political
> forces. A great deal of behind the scenes activity is underway
> now; ICANN itself is widely perceived as a failure.
> 
> A Board committee is not the forum in which these decisions
> should or will be made. The Board itself, which under the Lynn
> plan would be able to perpetuate itself by self-selecting
> its replacements in perpetuity, has a bit of a conflict of
> interest in reviewing other proposals, which is why the results
> of this particular exercise will not have much significance.
> 
> ICANN management and its dominant Board faction has
> made it clear what it wants (the Lynn plan). The Board has
> indicated that it is willing to ignore its own hand-picked ALSC,
> which consumed hundreds of thousands of dollars, and it
> is more than willing to ignore the DNSO (.org, .info country
> reservations, etc., etc.) Why do you think it will be any
> different this time?
> 
> I see no reason to expend any effort on this.
> 
> --MM
> 
> >>> Erick Iriarte <faia at amauta.rcp.net.pe> 03/27/02 08:34AM >>>
> FYI
> 
> Erick Iriarte
> 
> >Delivered-To: faia at amauta.rcp.net.pe
> >Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 09:34:37 -0800
> >From: Louis Touton <touton at icann.org>
> >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
> >X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
> >To: council at dnso.org
> >Subject: [council] Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform Seeks
> Public
> >Submissions
> >Sender: owner-council at dnso.org
> >
> >To the Names Council:
> >
> >At the ICANN Board meeting held in Accra on 14 March 2002, the
> Committee
> >on ICANN Evolution and Reform was charged with consulting with the
> >community concerning reform proposals and reporting back with
> >recommendations to be considered by the Board at its Bucharest
> meeting
> >on 28 June 2002.  As part of its work to meet this challenge, today
> the
> >Evolution and Reform Committee made the following announcement to the
> >community.  The Committee looks forward to working with the Names
> >Council in developing a sound approach to meeting the challenges that
> >face the entire ICANN community.
> >
> >Louis Touton
> >ICANN Secretary
> >
> >==================================================================
> >   Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform Seeks Public Submissions
> >
> >The Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform welcomes public input
> from
> >all interested persons or entities on the presently ongoing review of
> >ICANN's mission, structure, and processes. The earlier the input, the
> >more useful it will be in helping the Committee, so it encourages all
> >input as soon as possible. The Committee will of course consider all
> >comments received, but the expedited schedule that the Committee is
> >required to meet means that earlier comments will inevitably be more
> >useful than later ones. Any comments received after 29 April 2002 are
> >likely to be significantly less useful than those received by that
> date.
> >
> >While the Committee has not reached any conclusion that the proposal
> put
> >forth by Stuart Lynn is in whole or in part the most appropriate way
> to
> >meet this goal, it believes that proposal can serve as a useful point
> >of reference for analysis and discussion. Thus, it would be helpful
> for
> >comments to make reference to that document, and point out areas of
> >agreement and disagreement. The Committee would particularly benefit
> >from hearing views on:
> >
> >    (1) What is or should be ICANN's mission? In this regard, please
> use
> >the recent staff posting as your starting point, and tell us (a)
> which
> >if any of the activities listed there should not be part of ICANN's
> >mission, (b) whether there are additional activities not listed that
> >should be part of ICANN's mission, and (c) what mechanisms are
> >available, once ICANN's mission statement is finalized, to minimize
> the
> >risk that ICANN will stray beyond those boundaries.
> >
> >    (2) Are the issues raised in Stuart Lynn's report a correct
> >perception of the problems facing ICANN? If not, why not? What are
> the
> >real problems?
> >
> >    (3) Are the specific suggested reforms set forth in that report
> >appropriate, and likely to be workable and effective? If not, why
> not?
> >What are your ideas for workable and effective alternatives?
> >
> >    (4) Assuming you believe that structural and procedural reforms
> are
> >necessary to ensure that ICANN carries out its mission, what
> transition
> >mechanisms or approaches should be used to migrate from the status
> quo
> >to the future environment? Over what time period should this
> migration
> >take place?
> >
> >In addition to receiving and reviewing public input, the Committee
> plans
> >to engage in an intense effort to gather all relevant information
> >(including public comments past and future), consider all options
> that
> >are consistent with ICANN accomplishing its mission and remaining
> true
> >to its core values, reach out to those in the ICANN community that it
> >believes can be helpful, and make recommendations to the ICANN Board
> on
> >a schedule that will allow the Board to post whatever it sees fit no
> >later than 31 May 2002.
> >
> >Comments can be forwarded to the Committee in three different ways:
> >
> >    1. Substantive submissions can be made to
> reform-comments at icann.org.
> >All submissions made will be reviewed, sorted by subject, indexed,
> and
> >posted on the ICANN forum web site. This mechanism is intended to
> >promote thoughtful community discussion of the issues involved in the
> >ICANN reform process.
> >
> >    2. The Committee has also established an e-mail address
> >(reform at icann.org) which can be used for direct communications to the
> >Committee, including both inquiries and comments regarding the
> >Committee's report and proposals for the Committee's consideration.
> >Submissions to this address will not be routinely posted.
> >
> >    3. Finally, the existing web-based forum on President Lynn's
> proposal
> >will remain available to all who wish to use it. This forum is
> >automatically updated and will not be sorted in any way.
> >
> >The Committee encourages all interested parties to offer their views
> on
> >the important and complicated subject of ICANN evolution and reform.
> It
> >will appreciate all the help it can get in formulating
> recommendations.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss