RE: [ga] Behaviour and rights

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

> But a vote changes the people in place in the government, not the type of
> government itself.
> You vote every 4 years or so to replace the people in
> congress/senate/chamber/government/whatever_your_local_reality_is, not if
> the shape of the
> congress/senate/chamber/government/whatever_your_local_reality_is
> has to be
> changed. The latter can be done, of course, but it implies rewriting the
> rules of the game and it happens at much wider intervals.
> And in fact people on the ICANN Board are subject to change (with the
> notable exception of the 4 Boardsquatters, that most of us agree is a
> shame).

I disagree that Board squatters are a "notable exception", they are
indicative of the whole problem. ICANN lies. There is corruption at the
highest level of the organization. Since a government election changes only
the individuals who administer the system, and it is the system that has
allowed the problem to manifest itself, then it is not so simple as
replacing those who run ICANN. The sad fact is that those who have been
privileged to uphold the public interest, have not only abused their
position and dropped the ball, even worse, they have maneuvered themselves
into a position that allows the rules to be changed at will to suit their
own self interested ends at the expense of the general public. What we have
now is a mechanism that has been altered to such an extreme that it only
serves to perpetuate the advantages that these particular individuals.

To my mind, the purpose of this grass roots movement to have a vote on the
rebid of the ICANN contracts is to draw attention to the importance of
prudence in governance, in a way that will tell the decision makers that an
automatic renewal of the contracts between ICANN and the US Department of
Commerce is not necessarily the best course of action in the public interest
at this time. For me, that's a worthy goal, whether the initiative was taken
by Ralph Nadar's gang or Mickey Mouse, frankly I don't care - it is simply
"the right thing to do" in the situation.

Furthermore, I totally reject the suggestion that we need to debate a
possible ICANN replacement before taking such a vote, since a thorough
investigation of the options cannot possibly be addressed in only a few
days. Our duty is to identify the problem and this movement is about
acknowledging a problem exists in a very public way, that's all.

I have been trying to suppress my inclination to advocacy, since the
situation is already complicated enough, but if I were to advocate for one
amendment, it would be this - deny the current administration the right to
rebid on the ICANN contract. These individuals cannot be trusted. They lie,
they cheat, they steal, they are rotten to the core. Get rid of them.

Regards,
Joanna


--
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