Re: [ga] Consumer/Registrant Protection Consitituency

[James Love <love@cptech.org>]

Kent, your comment was pretty unfair, IMO.  The problem is the other way
around. ICANN itself has set out an agenda which is much more than
technical.  Why do we have a handful of TLDs?  Technical problems?   Why
do we have a UDRP?  Technical issues?   Why do we have anti-privacy
policies?  Technical issues?  When you make policy decisions, then
people care who has the power, and how they are selected.

   Jamie

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 08:43:45PM -0700, William S. Lovell wrote:
> > Which puts you in the position of ratifying ICANN's claim to be
> > a policy making rather than a technical coordinating body, does
> > it not?
>
> It is a sad irony that those who most vociferously complain about ICANN
> exceeding its mandate as a technical coordinating body are precisely the
> ones who exert the most pressure for it to become a global internet
> governance organization, with large scale global elections and an
> elaborate representational structure that some have compared to the UN.
> It is a great pity that those individuals, some of whom are otherwise
> quite intelligent, are simply oblivious to the intrinsic contradiction
> in their position, and to the inevitable consequences of that
> contradiction...
>
>

-- 
--------------------------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology, http://www.cptech.org
love@cptech.org, v. 1.202.387.8030, f 1.202.234.5176

--
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