Re: [ga] Motion asking for GA poll on rebid of ICANN contract

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>]

On 2002-05-02 10:29:43 -0400, James Love wrote:

>"I move that the GA poll its members, to record its views on 
>whether or not the US Department of Commerce should have an open 
>competition for the services now provided by ICANN.  The rationale 
>for asking for a rebid is that ICANN has dramatically changed the 
>intitial terms of refence for ICANN, and is proposing even further 
>changes, which have met extensive opposition in the Internet 
>community.  The rebid would allow the NTIA to consider 
>alternatives to the current ICANN plan for managing key Internet 
>resources. The vote should be taken within 10 days."

_Suggesting_ radical changes is one thing, _adopting_ them is an  
entirely different thing.  In particular, calling for a re-bid at  
this point of time would amount to a vote of no confidence in the  
entire ICANN structure as we know it.  Such a vote of no confidence  
would most likely remove the GA's (small) possibilities to influence 
the process in any reasonable manner.  (To draw the parallel: The GA 
would be - legitimately! - shocked if it was dissolved for  
_suggesting_ radical changes, such as a re-bid.)

If you insist on such a vote, I'd suggest that the vote should ask  
for a rebid under the condition that ICANN actually moves to _adopt_ 
radical changes which seem inconsistent with the white paper's  
_fundamental_ _principles_.

There are two possible ways of implementing this.  Either, such a  
vote could be held now, and explicitly list the principles the GA  
wants to see preserved.  Or, the vote could be held when ICANN  
actually crosses the Rubicon.  (Some will, of course, argue that it  
already has done so.)

There is one more thing one should keep in mind: There is no  
guarantee that the winner of a re-bid would be better than the  
current, or a reformed, ICANN.  I'd suggest that the GA doesn't ask  
for a re-bid unless it has reason to believe that such a re-bid 
would actually lead to an improvement.  Giving such reasons is up to 
you, James.

-- 
Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
--
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