[NCUC-DISCUSS] Fadi's strategy panels
Marc Perkel
marc at churchofreality.org
Fri Oct 18 00:35:42 CEST 2013
I see things differently. If you think ICANN is limited to just whois
and dns you're not seeing the big picture.
Internet Governance is something that is an emergent property of the
exponential growth of the Internet. A good way of looking at it is that
when the car was invented it led to the invention of traffic lights.
In the 1990s I used to sell network control software to big companies
and my customers we IT department heads. Sometime I would hear stories
about how they got a job that didn't exist 15 years earlier and often it
went like this:
"I was a salesman and I bought a TRS80 computer so I didn't have to
retype my proposals and because I was the first to have a computer I
ended up head of the IT department."
ICANN is the salesman with the TRS80. ICANN is in the right place at the
right time for IG to emerge. It is up to us to make sure it gets off to
a good start.
On 10/17/2013 5:44 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> Whois is something ICANN actually controls.
>
> ICANN's role in the IG ecosystem is NOT under ICANN's control.
>
> The future of Internet technology is NOT under ICANN's control.
>
> ICANN's MS processes can NOT be changed without the consent of the
> current constituencies and SGs.
>
> I continue to believe that active participation in these things will
> only inflate their importance.
>
> *From:*ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org
> [mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org] *On Behalf Of *Kathy Kleiman
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 17, 2013 8:11 AM
> *To:* ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> *Subject:* Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Fadi's strategy panels
>
> I agree with Avri that we ignore these new panels at our peril. The
> EWG is our history: where we mix true experts with an unbalanced set
> of well-known ICANN advocates committed to changing policy in their
> interest, we wind up with disastrous results.
> Best,
> Kathy
> :
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I think we ignore them at our peril. I doubt they will go away.
>
>
>
> Just like the EWG, it was supposed to be advisory, but as time goes on, it become more and the control point on all things whois derivative. Once the report is out, it will be almost impossible to not get stuck with its global collections and publication of information that should be private.
>
>
>
> Same thing with these the FSP. Just you watch, a recommendation will come from the so-called multistakeholder experts and there will be hardly a breath before we find elements of those recommendation approved by the Board and in implementation.
>
>
>
> Fadi made it quite clear that he does not support the bottom-up model and that he prefers something more like a middle in/out model. This is not necessarily an invalid way to create a multistakeholder model, but it is not the guarantee of ICANN with its bottom-up model.
>
>
>
> avri
>
>
>
> EWG Expert Working Group -
>
> FSP - Fadi Strategy Panel
>
>
>
>
>
> On 16 Oct 2013, at 14:48, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
>
>
> Ignore them, and they will go away.
>
>
>
> These panels not only have no legitimacy, there is really no clear explanation for why we need them and what they will do that meets a need defined by CANN's actual constituencies and communities.
>
>
>
> The idea that a group of 6 people led by someone who has never spent a minute in ICANN's process or in the formulation or analysis of DNS policy is going to make major reforms in process strikes me as especially ridiculous.
>
>
>
> --MM
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org> [mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org] On Behalf Of Jorge Amodio
>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 5:06 AM
>
> To: Avri Doria
>
> Cc:ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>
> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Fadi's strategy panels
>
>
>
>
>
> I agree. Fadi is going way too far from his role as CEO
>
>
>
> -Jorge
>
>
>
> On Oct 15, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Avri Doria<avri at acm.org> <mailto:avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> i thought people volunteered and where chosen as individuals.
>
>
>
> This is not a proper ICANN multistakeholder process, this is a president's blue ribbon panel by a different name.
>
>
>
> avri
>
>
>
> On 15 Oct 2013, at 15:02, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>
>
>
> I wonder if people have been invited in their personal capacities (in
>
> which case I assume Icann will foot the bill) or as reps of their
>
> organizations/constituencies?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20131017/f27c30f4/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list