[ga] A good joke...
Title: Help Interview with Stuart Lynn at Silicon.com:
"Icann's chief has hit back at claims the internet naming body is
disenfranchising the public by stopping its online elections for board
members. But Stuart Lynn, the organisation's president and CEO, explained the dual threat of fraud and vote-rigging has forced the organisation to stop online elections. Lynn told silicon.com: "Icann is not an experiment in online democracy." He denied it is excluding the public and added: "We want to find a new way to bring online users into the fold. We want to get more people involved - consumer groups and individuals." He added that the development of a secure and reliable online voting system is the remit of government and not his organisation. Lynn also claims the number of online voters is far too small to be significant. He added that issues of security, authentication and capture (i.e. vote-rigging) are so overwhelming that the organisation had no choice but to stop the online vote. But Icann does hold its hands up to critics claiming it needs to be more efficient and transparent. It has, in the past, been criticised for its lack of transparency and for being US-centric. But Lynn, who is set to retire next March, defended his work to date. He said: "ICANN HAS SO FAR SUCCEEDED MAGNIFICENTLY." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Richard Henderson's comments: (a) ICANN's opposition to Board members elected by the Internet public has nothing to do with worries about vote-rigging. They are opposed because they know such elections are likely to bring alternative and opposing views onto the Board and this would threaten their autocracy and vested interests. They know that's the truth. (b) Stuart Lynn says ICANN must be transparent. Well I've e-mailed him
repeatedly, along with Dan Halloran, concerning 14 serious issues which relate
to ICANN policy and its effects. (Copy details at IcannWatch: http://icannwatch.com/article.php?sid=735 )
and (Copy letter at GAfull: http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc10/msg01653.html )
After 57 days, neither has had the courtesy to acknowledge my mail. Am I
some kind of subhuman who doesn't merit their attention? Are people not allowed
to raise conserns and issues if they are awkward to answer? Is this
"transparency"? Is there anyone reading this who can help me get answers to my
questions please - because this unaccountable deletion of dialogue and serious
questions is: a tyranny. |