Re: [ga] FYI: "Overcoming ICANN"

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

I sat across a conference table from a true Socialist Government employee.

I handed him the MOU we had agreed upon, he handed it back unsigned.
He said he could not sign it because the project may not work.
For an hour I explained to him that as his country moved into a free
enterprise state he must understand;
True Freedom - Is the Freedom to Fail.  Once we have obtained failure we
are free to do something else.
Perhaps there are ashes from which this Phoenix can rise.  Perhaps there
are not.
DPF's idea has merit.

Eric

DPF wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:43:32 +0100, Thomas Roessler
> <roessler@does-not-exist.org> wrote:
> (in fact Dave Farber and co wrote)
> > - "Wide consensus has already been achieved on at least one key
> >   point -- even by ICANN's current president -- ICANN is seriously
> >   broken. We agree, and we additionally assert that ICANN's history,
> >   structure, and behaviors strongly indicate that the most
> >   productive course would be for ICANN's role in Internet affairs to
> >   be discontinued."
>
> I reluctantly came to the same conclusion as the esteemed Mr Farber
> the day the Board voted to kill the at large (which is what they did).
> Farber and co have expressed most eloquently why ICANN no longer has a
> mandate to perform its role.  This is a great pity as it will take
> some time to find a successor but that is the most productive thing we
> can now do.
>
> ICANN now has such a history and culture of non-transparency, secrecy,
> distrust and reneging that any attempts at reform are to be honest
> doomed to failure.  One would have to replace the majority of the
> Board and the senior management to even come close to having faith in
> ICANN's ability to manage the naming and addressing systems.  Major
> stakeholders such as the RIRs, the ccTLDs, IETF are all re-addressing
> their relationship with ICANN.
>
> There can be no question in my mind that ICANN has failed to not only
> live up to its founding principles but is in flagrant breach of the
> agreement with DOC and the White Paper.
>
> Therefore it is time as Mr Farber says to turn our energies to
> devising the best successor or successors to ICANN.  This need not be
> complicated as the RIRs and ccTLDs are pretty much self managing and
> some structure is already in place for gTLD issues.
>
> Let us walk away from ICANN as a noble but failed experiment and work
> towards a replacement which can apply to DOC to take up the challenge
> which ICANN management has passed off as too hard.
>
> Therefore I call upon interested persons to step forward with offers
> of help for two things:
>
> 1) Hosting a petition site for members of the Internet Community to
> sign up to support the redelegation away from ICANN of all naming and
> addressing responsibilities
>
> 2) Hosting of mailing lists and or forums to create a replacement or
> replacements for ICANN
>
> Originally I planned to work quietly with a few people on the issue of
> proposing a replacement organisation to ICANN, but as so many people
> are now publicly endorsing that ICANN should lose its right to manage
> the naming and addressing system it seems timely to step forward and
> add my voice in support.
>
> DPF
> --
> david@farrar.com
> ICQ 29964527
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html