Re: [ga] No Funds for Proper Analysis

[Derek Conant <dconant@dnsga.org>]

Hang loose everyone. That's Mai Tai.

Derek Conant wrote:

> In Stockholm I was 6 hours ahead.
> In Kona now I'm 6 hours behind.
> I will get to this after a few Mai Ties.
>
> Mahalo!
>
> Jefsey Morfin wrote:
>
> > Dear Derek,
> > this post is interesting. Please do not be hurt as it is not intended
> > and this is basis for further analysis, but this exactly the powerfull
> > rolling process to construct uncessary institutions.
> >
> > What is the Internet? A consensus. Billion of people agreeing the
> > same thing: to use TCP/IP protocols to dialog together. This is
> > nothing more. Question: is Internet necessary to TCP/IP? No.
> > Is TCP/IP necessary to the Internet? Yes. From this one can say
> > that the Internet is part of the TCP/IP usage. Would you make the
> > Internet boring, TCP/IP users would move out of the Internet. This
> > is whet one start hearing around: OpenNet a successor to the
> > Internet.
> >
> > I agree with you the DNSO is a mess and the iCANN is of no other
> > use than allowing the USG to delegates something they do not
> > know what to do with, and they do not even own as it does not exist.
> >
> > So why do you care about groupies - they are fun. I love calling
> > Kent or Dave or Harald or Robert or Joop or Patrick or Danny or
> > me a groupy. They enjoy time that way, disputing absurd issues
> > about a group of 30 people. (BoD + Staff).  Looks like a Parent
> > Association of 8 years old class.
> >
> > iCANN is of no use:
> > - if they had some use in root management they would hire a
> >    Technical manager
> > - TLD management? .. they even mess the few the create in
> >    entering collider.  Two TLD  a year: creating one to 1000
> >    TLDs takes me 10  minutes (I automated the process :-) ).
> > - they are of no use in creatig IP addresses. Too complex, too
> >    politictal for them. Will be taken over..
> > - they have some use in alocating Proteocl numbers: you need
> >    to have someone rememberng were the book is.
> >
> > Oh, no I am wrong. They have a use: to have peole sqwaking
> > about them. Look at the number of sites, documents, etc...
> > iCANN has nothing to do with the net, it is pure show.biz
> >
> > Frankly. Why do you want me to put a penny in funding the
> > iCANN? Please give me a good reason to help such a
> > charity (?), research (?), educational (?) corporation.... I am
> > 99% concerned in the iCANN for one single reason: to lower
> > the harm it can cause to me.
> >
> > Now, would the iCANN stick to its bylaws and accept TLDs
> > as unlimited Members it could provide some good internationad
> > consensus secretariat. It could be of some good use. But
> > the $ 50.000 application fee into the "international TLD
> > business" killed that..... and I am afraid your propositions
> > are not correcting it. Or am I wrong?
> >
> > Jefsey
> >
> > On 17:13 09/06/01, Derek Conant said:
> > >Who knows what they are talking about here?  There needs to be a process
> > >here that funds the development and advancement of the constructive
> > >questions and comments being submitted by participants.
> > >
> > >What we have here is a failure to obtain the funding necessary to
> > >present any meaningful comprehensive analysis, compiled by experts
> > >presenting statistical data and information concerning the subject
> > >matter being addressed by the DNSO.
> > >This is primarily why I expressed the necessity of ICANN Approved
> > >Proposal Organizations (APOs) at:
> > >http://dnsga.org/announcements/atlarge_5june01.html.
> > >
> > >APOs can be profit and non-profit organizations that qualify to
> > >represent their studies, constituencies and/or members.   ICANN will
> > >need to evolve toward a structural model and system that gives
> > >organizations the incentive to fund comprehensive analysis, compiled by
> > >experts presenting statistical data and information concerning the
> > >subject matter being addressed by ICANN Supporting Organizations.
> > >
> > >The APO competition component is clearly apparent in the DNSO process
> > >and forums.  This is clearly evident by the existence of established
> > >groupies in the DNSO process and forums and their refusal to acknowledge
> > >and investigate constructive comments and positions from one not in
> > >their group.  It is also apparent that said groupies feel threatened
> > >when constructive comments and positions are presented.  Groupies exist
> > >in the DNSO process and forums and they appear to be preventing the
> > >development and advancement of constructive dialog if the comment and
> > >position contribution does not agree with, or does not come from one in
> > >the established group.
> > >
> > >If ICANN is going to allow the formation of groupies in its processes,
> > >then these groupies that believe that they know what they are talking
> > >about should step up to the plate with money to fund comprehensive
> > >analysis, compiled by experts presenting statistical data and
> > >information concerning the subject matter being addressed, that proves
> > >the groupies position.
> > >
> > >The ICANN Supporting Organizations and ICANN Board should be relying on
> > >experts presenting statistical data and information concerning the
> > >subject matter being addressed.  ICANN should not be developing its
> > >policy and standards upon a process that is not funded and relies on
> > >non-experts.
> > >
> > >ICANN and the Internet is mature enough now to begin the process of
> > >restructuring its Supporting Organizations and to engage the APO
> > >concept.  The APO concept would invite organizations from around the
> > >world to fund ICANN internationalization and the development and
> > >advancement of international policy and standards.  The Governments of
> > >the world would also have incentive to fund ICANN internationalization
> > >through APO processes.
> > >
> > >I am submitting this for constructive criticism.
> > >
> > >Derek Conant
> > >DNSGA President and Chairman
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > >Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > >("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > >Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html