DNSO Archives: [ga-full]

Jamie Love wrote:

"WHAT ARE THEY THINKING? The Committee on ICANN "reform" and evolution has
released its most astonishing document yet. It wipes away every single
area where there might be independence from a completely all powerful board
of directors, which can pretty do whatever it wants with the global DNS
system and controls its own elections (by hand picking its electors). It
takes the current dysfunctional body, the ICANN DNSO, which is supposed to
make bottom up policy for domain name policy, and it replaces it with a
system where the ICANN board directly picks its chair and as many members of
the steering committee it considers appropriate. It eliminates an elected
chair of the DNSO General Assembly. It take away the DNSO's right to elect
members of the ICANN board, and the new "GNSO" can't really decide anything
anymore anyway, just in case the total control by the ICANN board isn't
enough of a power grab. It gets rid of the "PSO", which includes
independent groups as the IETF or the W3C, which have not been sufficiently
docile. The DoC MoU required independent review process, which was never
implemented, is now toast. There is a loser pays arbitration just to ask
if the ICANN board is not obeying its own bylaws, which of course it can
change at the drop of a hat if it needs to.

This document is so completely in your face to the US Department of Commerce
and the Internet community one has to admire the guts of the current ICANN
board. Vint Cerf, Joe Sims and the Reform Committe make Bill Gates and
Steve Balmer look like wimps. Jamie"

Jamie, you're drinking too much coffee too early -- or more likely, you fully understand that you are mischaracterizing, but do it anyway. Anyone that takes the time to actually read the recommendations would notice that the Nominating Committee that you rail against is explicitly intended to be a broad-based representative body; that the recommendations explictly call for changes in the current GNSO constituencies to better reflect all relevant interests; and that the criteria for Board members specifically includes representation of all affected communities. Of course, we all know that your political objective is to push the position that anything other than direct elections is unacceptable for world democracy, so it is tactically necessary for you ignore these facts. This means that people interested in knowing what the recommendations really call for will have to read the actual document rather than rely on the characterizations of agents provocateur like Jamie, whose main interest is in advancing a very specific political agenda that has already been demonstrated to not command consensus support in the ICANN community.

I've copied this to the GA list to save the trouble of having to respond to a similar screed on that list later.

Joe Sims
Jones Day Reavis & Pogue
51 Louisiana Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20001
Direct Phone:  1.202.879.3863
Direct Fax:  1.202.626.1747
Mobile Phone:  1.703.629.3963

==============================
The preceding e-mail message (including any attachments) contains information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
==============================

[ga-full]

[ga] Re: global government without representation ICANN style