[ga] Re: Open Letter to Mr Jeff Neuman from The Internet Challenge

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let us see all of this for what it is... the hogs outside the trough runs are
howling about the hogs who managed to finagle their way somehow to the direct
source of human limbs and whatever else a hog will eat that flows from the feed
chutes of Power.  Oh yes...  There is a human element to all this, ya'll
remember?

Like Nietzsche's Zarathustra, I too confess a love for what is earned by blood
and spirit. All else is artifice, smoke and mirrors, for a token Press (as a
grand gesture, no less).  In the final analysis only a drastic change will be a
change, and we will come to that sooner -methinks- rather than later; one way or
the other.  There is a war going on.  BTW, can anyone point out the front line?

At the very least, here in the centre of the maelstrom of the biggest power grab
in History, we could have the End of History happen this very moment and nobody
would be satisfied; not the media barons; not the consumers; not the elites, nor
the plebs... and would it all have been worth it?  To sell it all down the river
for dollars and cents?  All that dissatisfaction?!!  Think of the Ratings!

I paused in my workout today and had a thought to myself (if you can actually
believe that!) I wondered: What is it that drives the minds who participate in
these ICANNia forums and conundrums?  Is it all professional self-interest?
Corporate interest?  National interest(s)? Economic (not to be confused/linked
with humanity in any way) interests?  Class or guild interests? The Devil
himself?  What!?

There is something rotten in Denmark friends.  The stink of it appalls the
entire spectrum of all the senses.  In fact, it's an overload.  This little .biz
re-registration fiasco pales in comparison to the threat to the integrity of the
WWW dns as a whole.  We are at a crossroads, each of you "power brokers" need to
think about what your roles are on the chessboard of History, that is, if you
deem it worthy of continuance.

There are legitimate concerns that are going unaddressed, indeed not even
commented upon by the people who ought to be responsible for oversight of the
contracts they basically coerced people to sign.  If only they would be so
assiduous in other areas of their multifarious coordination role.

Friends, Strangers, Human Beings, let us not lose this war... it will be our
last.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
                    Human



Richard Henderson wrote:

> Dear Jeff and Vint,
>
> Further "mass registrations" and "exclusive" registrars lists continue to
> come to light as the .biz Group 2B data is analysed.
>
> For example, please could somebody (um... like eName themselves?) explain
> how only TWO registrants applied through eName in the .biz 2B names release.
>
> These TWO registrants managed to get 2061 names between them. No-one else on
> the planet got a single name.
>
> Registrant 1: Eclipse Technologies = 2021 names
>
> Registrant 2: Kensys Technologies = 40 names
>
> This forms part of the continuing pattern of Registrars affording exclusive
> privilege to a single (or two) customers.
>
> The following registrants may merit your scrutiny, Jeff:
>
> RegisterNamesHere = 2089 names through Bulk Register and already up for
> sale.
>
> Patrice Panon through Book My Name = 1962 names
>
> Eclipse Technologies = 2021 names (They were eNames only applicants, apart
> from Kensys Technologies who got 40 names. No-one else on the planet got a
> look in.)
>
> Other registrants who were "exclusive" to a registrar = 842 names
> (previously documented for you)
>
> TOTAL SO FAR (12 registrars out of 65 analysed to date) = 6914 names
>
> This is 17 percent of the total names available in the .biz Group 2B names
> release. This figure will surely grow.
>
> I feel that you need to investigate these with urgency, Jeff, and no doubt
> you are.
>
> I also feel that ICANN owe it to the Internet community to guarantee this
> sort of "exclusive dealing" by registrars won't recur in the forthcoming
> .info Landrush 2.
>
> Vint, as far as I know, ICANN has released absolutely NO statement about
> either THIS .biz situation , or about the forthcoming .INFO situation. What
> is ICANN's position on this?
>
> That is a fairly straightforward question, I should have said.
>
> And a second question: what ACTION, if any, does ICANN plan to take in the
> .info Landrush 2 to protect the Internet community from further
> discrimination by "exclusive" registrars who only deal for themselves or a
> special individual?
>
> PLEASE could ICANN respond to reasonable questions like this. I know Mr
> Stearns will be particularly interested in your responsiveness on this
> issue, and I hope to have the opportunity to contribute to the hearing that
> Billy Tauzin has proposed. All points of views and suggestions to Fred Upton
> on 202-225-3761.
>
> It's not too much to ask for a response, I hope.

--
Wherever one turns there is a desperate need for work to be done, and the
unemployed would be delighted to do it, if
they had a chance. The work would be highly beneficial to them and their
communities -- beneficial to people, not
profits, and therefore no contribution to economic health, in the technical
sense. It is important to master the
distinction between "the health of the economy" and human welfare, notions that
can be virtually uncorrelated. All of
this is one part of a catastrophic failure of the economic system, which is
incapable of bringing together needed work
and idle hands of suffering people. Of course, this catastrophic failure is
hailed as a grand success, as indeed it is for a
narrow sector of privilege -- which happens to include the people who give the
speeches, write the articles, and sing
the odes to our magnificence.

Noam Chomsky
http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/loot9406-industry-vs-labor.html

begin:vcard 
n:Sotiropoulos;Sotiris 
tel;work:416-422-1034
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:sotiris@hermesnetwork.com
fn:Sotiris Sotiropoulos
end:vcard