Re: [ga] RE: Motion # 1 - addendum

["John Palmer" <jp@ADNS.NET>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "jefsey" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>
To: <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 6:40 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] RE: Motion # 1 - addendum


> Dear Joanna,
> I do not support that text as such as not enough worked and IMHO not
> properly addressed not detailed yet. I have introduced many propositions
to
> add to that motion you did not take into account.
>
> I know that this is difficult, but since you took the role of writer, I
> suggest you now proceed on a step by step basis.
>
> 1. what is the purpose of the motion?
>      - disruptive
>      - advisory
>      - force to a dialog
>      - obtain missing responses
>      - "suicide"
>

Advisory and to force a dialog amongst the internet users of the world. To
inform them that
the name system has been hijacked by a corrupt monopoly.

> 2. to who should it be addressed to?
>      - formally
>        - to the BoD
>        - to the NC
>        - to the DoC
>        - to the world
All of the above

>        - to the outerspace
Dont be silly

>      - actually
>        - to the DoC to obtain a decision
>        - to the BoD to make them moving
>        - to the reform committee as a warning
>        - to the GAC members to create a problem they will have to solve
>        - to the Congress
>        - to the Press
All of the above.

>        - to our own ego
This is not about ego. Its serious business

>
> 3. what is our real reason?
>      - that we are unhappy with the ICANN principle
>      - that we see that the current ICANN structure will never work
BINGO!
>      - that we have real concerns about the DNS stability
>      - that we have concern for the world's economy structure under the
> present DNS managment
... and this is the result of current ICANN never working

>
> 4. what is our real target?
>      - to support external propositions
>      - to develop a GA proposition
>      - to permit a real debate on real element and not only on Stuart's
> emotions
>      - to protect national interests and security
>      - to protect business interests
>
1. To get them out of "power" before they do more damage with their
monopoly.
2. To prevent TLD theft like what happened with .BIZ
3. To open up the root so that there can be thousands of TLDs like there
should
be.
4. To once again reaffirm the "rough consensus and running code" concept
that
made the internet and is still the only way that it will work. If I create a
registry,
and am the first to operate a TLD, I should be able to be listed in the root
5. To smash WIPO's control over the namespace. Intellectual property
concerns
have NO place in domain names.

I could go on, but you get the idea.


> 5. what are the elements missing in the current ICANN mission?
No, the question is, what dozens of things are they doing that they
should not be doing.

>      I listed a few of them which should be listed in whereas, but many
> others may be indentified and then filtered to obtain a realistic and easy
> to understand list for press and Congress
>
> The question is not we will commit suicide or not, the question is the
time
> we will spend on it to be of use. Eben if it is only for the records: it
> will help in the future to disqualify those who did not tried to save the
> Internet from ICANN's bureaucracy.
>
> Until that work is done, I reseve my support to this motion.
> jfc
>

Hope this helps
John

--
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