Re: [ga] Evaluating Participation
Title: Help Brilliant analysis, Danny
And its worth noting that the Registrar Mailing List submissions consist
almost entirely of posts discussing which hotel/location to choose for their
next meeting rather than anything substantive - no offence to the legitimate
issues which ARE discussed by the Registrars constituency (Michael Palage
sometimes posts some very interesting links etc) and Bob Connelly has total
integrity so I'll always listen to him - but the point remains:
Where the ICANN community is really alive and discussing is exactly in
those constituencies whcih are least represented under the Lynn reforms.
The whole tide of opinion is flowing AWAY from the Board's opaque dealings
and anti-democratic initiatives. ICANN is becoming an embarrassment to the US
government. ICANN is criticised in may quarters. And what does the leadership
do? Try to consolidate its position and cling onto power.
Stuart Lynn vilified the Public Forums as "laughable". Of course a public
forum attracts loonies. But much substantial information has been brought to
light by these forums. And look at them! Thousands upon thousands of
contributions (many of them serious and honest). They provide a lively and
legitimate part of the ICANN community.
If the ICANN leadership had any credibility and any respect left, they
would participate, and respond to questions, and engage in dialogue. But instead
they skulk away and just hope everyone will go away.
I still await replies (or even acknowledgement) from Dan Halloran to
serious points sent to him 125 days ago. No. ICANN is not engaged in
dialogue. ICANN does not want real representation (look what it did to its own
At Large). It does not want open discussion and alternative views which
may threaten its autocracy.
Your analysis is excellent, Danny. It highlights exactly where the reality
is, and where the real engagement is carrying on.
Richard Henderson
|