Re: [ga] Consensus & Names Council Task Forces

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Amen to Joanna and Bravo to Danny.
Just something more, Danny: I am not here to make any good to the ICANN. 
You had noted that a long ago. I am only interested in avoiding the ICANN' 
s creep and greed make all of us too much harm and definitly spoil what we 
have built together in good faith and with efficiency over the last 25 
years. This is the position very well documented by the NZ NIC people and 
many ccTLDs. ccTLD and GA "activists" have been imposed the ICANN. The 
others are using it.
Jefsey

On 12:13 26/11/01, Joanna Lane said:
>on 11/25/01 3:55 PM, DannyYounger@cs.com at DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
>
> > It will never become more than it currently is because
> > individually its members are not prepared to make a commitment to necessary
> > involvement -- even those GA members that ran for ICANN Board seats 
> would not
> > commit to actually showing up at an ICANN meeting.
>
>I understand the frustration and sense of disappointment you must be feeling
>at this time and while I can agree that trying to do business with moral and
>ethical cripples is a singularly unpleasant experience, I cannot agree that
>it would make any difference if the entire GA shows up for these meetings or
>not. My reasons include the following:-
>
>1. If ICANN was ever intended to be a bottom-up, consensus building
>organization, it would not now be run by an appointed 6 member Executive
>Committee that has all the powers of the corporation at its disposal,
>including over its finances. This evidence is staring the GA in the face.
>
>2. ICANN is a monumental failure in industry self-regulation, including with
>respect to the separation of the .com registry/ registrar, the registrar
>transfer agreement, UDRP, Inclusive Roots, dot.info, dot.biz. dot.aero and
>the dot.pro fiascos. Any success it claims for itself is entirely due to the
>fact that the internet was always going to be popular despite mismanagement.
>
>3. ICANN defeats reasoned opposition by moving goal posts. No amount of
>people getting together f2f is going to overcome that winning strategy.
>
>4. The GA has taken on the role of being the internet industry's critic.
>Telling a person who does not want to hear it that they have a problem draws
>one of two responses - denial that a problem exists, or insistence that the
>problem is yours and not theirs. In other words, hanging out ICANN's dirty
>laundry in public does not mean they will buy your washing machine, however
>you approach them.
>
>You also claim that the GA as a whole has failed to follow working methods
>that could have produced tangible results. I have been thinking about this,
>and have carefully reviewed those used by others in the community.  Contrary
>to what you state, and based on methods used that have actually proved
>successful, I would say that the most likely way to achieve tangible results
>would be to completely ignore the Bylaws and use a combination of tactics
>from the following list:-
>
>revisionism (useful for making discreet amendments to published documents on
>community websites), denying input from selected groups (useful to ensure
>constituencies recommend policies that fit with master plan), witholding
>information (in particular financial expenditure/ budgetary cuts that cannot
>be substantiated), claiming a "narrow technical mission" (avoids engagement
>in an argument one cannot win), claiming "societal issues" must be given
>proper consideration in policy decisions (useful to advance "mission
>creep"), claiming lack of adequate representation/ consensus building
>procedures (isolates and disarms opponents), issuing a Press Release to
>claim wide community support for a new policy (avoids having to produce any
>supporting documentation), claiming that ICANN is an evolving process (valid
>defense against material evidence of failed policies), denying that ICANN is
>a legal enforcing organization (protects the interests of donors that are in
>breach of contract), withdrawing Secretariat services (good for sabotaging
>the tenure of potentially effective Chairs and Working Groups), creating an
>intake committee (filtering device to eliminate unwanted agenda items),
>making an announcement to run a particular course of action (useful to
>override a resolution that has been passed for an opposite course of action
>- only effective if the issue has been ignored for a while), deciding that
>the views of 7 - 21 people represents community consensus (reduces the
>workload to substantiate desired results/ eliminates assembly input without
>the need to restructure) and last but not least, bribing (useful to ensure
>the successful outcome of almost anything - including "elections")
>
>
>It may well be proved right that the only way to make a difference now is to
>reform ICANN from the outside, but it would be a mistake to think that ICANN
>is willing to give up any of the power it has tasted. It is an empire
>builder constrained only by a temporary oversight situation. Once the ccTLDs
>are in contract, which seems inevitable, I imagine ICANN will be released
>from US jurisdiction and then further resistance can be ignored simply by
>moving offshore.
>
>Your efforts against all of these odds have been amongst the greatest, and
>you will always command my highest respect for your tireless efforts and the
>endless ways in which you have tried, and tried again and continue to try.
>But it's important to understand that what we are dealing with here is not a
>failure of the GA, but organized corruption at the highest levels, and it
>really is not appropriate to accuse the bottom of a failure that is clearly
>the responsibility of those at the opposite end of the organization.
>
>Thank you.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Joanna
>
>The URLs for Best Practices: DNSO Citation:
>http://www.dnso.org/dnso/gaindex.html
>(Under "Other Information Documents"; "August 2001:
>Proposal for Best Practices for the DNSO GA")
>Part I:
>http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010813.GA-BestPractices.html
>Part II:
>http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010813.GA-BP-flowchart.pdf
>(Access to the .pdf file requires installing the Adobe Acrobat
>Reader, which is available for free down load at
>http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.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