Re: [ga] Re: Names Council Resolution on Reform

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>]

Dan -
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Steinberg" <synthesis@videotron.ca>
To: "todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>
Cc: "Sandy Harris" <sandy@storm.ca>; <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 7:31 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Names Council Resolution on Reform


> Ummmm todd,
> this still does not answer the question.

My apologies - I will answer it this time.

> the question was about mgmt of
> the root....

See below in the original text -

> not about the admin stuff. AFAIK, Karl never requested a
> copy of any zone file or other live data...did he?

Not that I know of. What Karl asked for was finances.

>
> todd glassey wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dan Steinberg" <synthesis@videotron.ca>
> > To: "Sandy Harris" <sandy@storm.ca>
> > Cc: <ga@dnso.org>
> > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 2:49 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Names Council Resolution on Reform
> >
> > > ummmmmmm,
> > > Karl may correct me at any time but it is my understanding that his
suit
> > > was about access to records and directors' rights/responsibilities.
> > > Nothing in any file documents I read mentioned technical management of
> > > the internet.
> >
> > > While it may be argued by many (including myself) that there has been
a
> > > failure on the 'open and transparent' front, I fail to see how Karl's
> > > suit was an expample of ICANNs failure to manage the root in an open
and
> > > transparent way.

This next paragraphs especially are just my personal opinion and not part of
that of anyone else's necessarily
---------------------------------------------------------
becuase as Directors of a NPO, they (the members of the ICANN Operations
Team) forced a director to sue for access to documents that by law he is
required to have access to. This is not particular to the operations of the
root, it is corporate negligence and incompetence in the operations of a
California Corporation. ICANN has set itself up so that there is no feedback
loop so there is really a smokescreen between how ICANN operated and that of
any open corporation.

The Fair and Open operations of the Root include not only the DNS portions
of the Root and its attachements, but also to the business of the
organization that operates the root. So from a corporate stance this is why,
and this is critical to understanding ICANN's current operational health.
For instance if one of the Director's or member of the execom of ICANN was a
crook and had for instance embesseled millions of dollars or was involved in
fixing who could and couldnot be a registrar... it potentially could not be
long before ICANN would be belly up and how would any of the people that
hade paid ICANN $6 for a domain have any recourse?  That's the problem with
being the one and only.

How would we know whether ICANN ExeCom members were flying at the expense of
the organization in first class surroundings to exotic cities half a world
away and then writing the trips off - just to have a staff meeting.You see
these are things that people that invest into something would never
tolerate.

ICANN further exacerbates this by that ICANN has hid from Domain Owners how
much of that Domain Registration Fee goes to ICANN, this further speaks to
ICANN's not wanting public scrutiny of it, or its books. So what is it that
this ICANN really is? My feeling is that we wont know partially until we see
its financials.

"Standard Disclaimers Apply"
Todd



--
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