[ncdnhc-discuss] Fwd: [nc-deletes] Minutes - Conference Call, November 15

[t byfield]

apisan at servidor.unam.mx (Tue 11/19/02 at 10:32 PM -0600):

> Now, the lack of response to your call for expressions seems to underline
> that either the problem is insoluble, the non-commercial organizations
> here have their domain names under ccTLDs which are a lot more friendly
> than the registries and registrars for gTLDs, the representatives of these
> organizations in the constituency are actually not involved with domain
> names except theoretically, or a combination.

alejandro --

this remark seems mainly oriented toward discrediting the NC. 

by ignoring the larger context within which the NC functions -- namely,
that ICANN's nomenklatura have made it very clear that they will pick
and choose to whom they are 'accountable' -- you miss the point. there
is very little reason to engage with these issues. we all know that the
board, of which *you* are a long-standing member, will do whatever it
wants, which mainly consists of deferring to staff recommendations. if
you're looking to discredit any entity at all, i suggest you start at 
the top of your top-down organization.

one practical place to start would be lynn's recent 'personal' remarks
on 'a plan of action regarding new gTLDs.' there are any number of fora
where lynn could have aired these remarks for discussion within ICANN's
so-called process. instead, in keeping with the tradition of his office,
he established them as a clear, programmatic agenda with the explicit
endorsement of ICANN's staff and board. have you objected to this? if
not, why not? and why, if you don't object to that, have you takien the
time to cast aspersions on the NC as an organization that isn't direct-
ly or operationally involved?

these aren't rhetorical questions.

cheers,
t