Re: [ga] your comments

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Wed, 29 May 2002 14:24:17 -0400, "Joe Sims" <jsims@JonesDay.com>
wrote:

>2.  You can argue with the facts all you want, but they are still facts.
>If ICANN was fully formed and funded, and then performed badly, you would
>have a good case for doing something different.  But since it has not had
>either feature, in large part because of efforts by you and your
>compatriots  to try to force down the rest of the world's throats your view
>of ICANN as world government, then there is hardly a case for ICANN having
>failed since it has never really ever been fully formed and operational.

So any perceived failure on the part of ICANN is the fault of its
critics and not the fault of the Board or its staff????

With respect Mr Sims this is hardly a balanced view.  In areas where
ICANN has clearly failed such as ccTLD contracts this is almost
entirely due to a blundering strategic approach by the staff who have
tried to almost blackmail ccTLDs rather than negotiate with them.

As an example of how stupid and petty this is, the .nz ccTLD manager
moved buildings well over a year ago.  ICANN *refuse* to update our
address in the IANA database until InternetNZ sign a contract with
them so the result is official mail from ICANN (including their
request for a donation to be made as a good faith gesture!!!) goes to
a near empty building on the other side of town.

Now this level of idiocy is not going to make .nz sign a contract with
ICANN.  It is however going to greatly reduce the chance of any "good
faith donations" continuing to be made.

DPF
--
david@farrar.com
ICQ 29964527
--
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