<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Joe Sims to Politech re: Gilmore interview
http://www.politechbot.com/p-03717.html
What I find very interesting, aside from the totally defensive tone of Mr. Sims'
tirade, is that most of the accounts that I have heard from those who participated
in that early history tend to corroborate Gilmore's version.
"...the Board is not divided at all; the vast majority of its votes result in a
larger than two-thirds majority..."
In addition, his comments regarding the board leave out that individuals are
represented by a serious minority of the board and that those selected by the
DNSO are representatative of the consituencies rather than individuals, who have
no consituency, AND that the most influential of the board members are
squatters who have never been elected at all and do not even closely represent
individuals' views. And this is a supposedly "non-profit, public benefit
corporation" that works with "transparency" and from "the bottom up." Really.
Granted, ICANN is not making a profit, but it is paying outrageous fees to
some who are. Hmmm..... pro bono and billing at cost... what does that mean?
Cost at what rate, exactly? Let's see those "at cost" figures from the Jones Day
side of things.
Joe made a lot of cracks and levied insults, but did not provide anything
substantive. His defensiveness is to be expected, IMO. He is, after all, being
attacked by many.
It does not change the facts, however. From every account I have heard and
read from those present at meetings and those who knew and worked with Jon
Postel, he was, indeed, threatened and did, indeed, cave in to those who were
determined to place the cartel in power. Then he died tragically. This was a
man who was human, after all, and did his level best. He was rather idealistic -
a very good thing, IMO, and saw that government control over the ccTLDs was
not the best idea for users. And that is just one area where he was right.
Gilmore is also correct in saying that Jon Postel wanted to see hundreds of
TLDs opened to the public and put out a call for those who wished to operate
them. It's really a horrible shame that he passed away. There would probably
not have been a manufactured shortage of domains because .com would have
been one of many available TLDs in the USG root. He did want to see 150 added
quickly and more each year.
After Jon died, ICANN was a done deal with the board entrenched, a set of
bylaws that would give the board license to change them at willc to grab power
over the public use of the USG root and hand out monopolies in any future TLDs
it might deign to allow to exist. All this, without any meaningful voice of the vast
majority of internet users, who are, after all, the most important ones - or
certainly should be.
"This point simply reveals Gilmore's lack of understanding of the law
business...."
I thought it was a profession. Hmmm.... What, exactly was the position of
the law firm prior to ICANN in terms of income and notariety? How much
has it grown since becoming ICANN's retained legal firm?
"...Gilmore and his more personally offensive colleagues. ..."
Might Gilmore and his colleagues feel the same about Joe Sims and his
colleagues?
Now let's see. Karl's lawsuit is over the fact that a director should have
unfettered access to all the corporation's records. He should not have to sign
something that restricts his duties and rights as a director and he should not
have to ask the board's permission to have that access. On many boards, there
have been directors in collusion who would seek to prevent another director from
accessing certain records - could be damaging to certain persons and entities.
That is one reason why any board member has the duty and right to inspect
those records in full and without signing for permission to do so. Requiring his
signature on that questionable document is just what is to be avoided.
Distribution of confidential material is covered under law, so why should the
board be involved in granting permission with that caveat? If Karl were to break
the law, he would be personally liable for it, as would any other board member
who did the same. Material that is not confidential (personnel, legal) should be
open to inspection anyway. Every dime spent and every dime of income to the
corporation should be public information. Isn't it interesting that Jamie Love
asked in Bucharest how much was being paid to Jones Day to defend against
karl and was refused an answer? Why the secrecy?
Gilmore was not off the mark in his interview, IMO. Joe Sims is. Shame on you.
Leah
--
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|