Re: [ga] Posting rights of Jeff Williams suspended for 14 days.

["L. Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

Stephane,

I would be interested in your definition of "troll."  Is it language or 
content?  Attitude?

I ask because I get the impression that you categorize ICANN critics as 
trolls while those who play into the games that ICANN plays are not.  

I don't defend foul language or ad hominems, certainly.  However, in many 
instances I have overlooked the format, spelling and language to get to 
the meaning of the posts.  

As for the word fascist, the dictionary says this:

1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that 
of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual 
and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a 
dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible 
suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or 
dictatorial control 

Where does this definition mention murder or genocide?  Comparisons to 
tyrants like Mussolini are uncalled for, IMO, but the concept of fascism 
is not unlike ICANN's policies or rule either.  For all the rhetoric 
spewed from ICANN, its policies are autocratic, eliminate the voice of the 
public in any meaningful manner and suppress opposition by its actions to 
eliminate the At-Large.  The only difference from the dictionary 
definition, IMO, is exclusion by race.  ICANN is the "nation" that 
supports only its special interests (the few at the top).  It causes 
severe hardship on anyone else.

Please keep in mind that much of my family was lost due to genocide, so I 
am certainly not insensitive to that concept.  I just cannot see where the 
definition of the term fascist automatically equates to murder.  I would 
prefer the term autocracy, but what the heck...

Jefsey (correct me if I misspeak) posted that collaborators  were those 
who infiltrated the occupying regime in order to fight from within and 
possibly influence policy for the benefit of the people.  However, in most 
cases, as was borne out later, collaborators were those who simply 
capitualted and went the easy route to save themselves.  Resistance 
fighters were those who remained true to their countries and countrymen.  
Of course, we have to look at the larger picture.  The occupiers were 
conquerors, not liberators.  They brutalized the economy, people...  Had 
they been liberators, "collaborators" might have been seen as helpful to 
their countrymen.  

So, what do we have here?  Resistance = trolls.  Collaborators = ?  Some 
of the trolls claim that working from within ICANN is a losing battle and 
a waste of time.  Some who "collaborate" feel that one must work from 
within ICANN in order to succeed.

>From where I sit, it seems that working from within ICANN will take an 
enormous amount of time and effort for a dubious, and probably dismal, 
result.  In its present form, ICANN will not work for the benefit of the 
greater community no matter what the ALAC does.  It will continue to 
suppress the public and any opposition to the cartel it supports.  Can 
working from within change this?  Doubtful.  

OTOH, there must be some level headed individuals on committees, I 
suppose, or there will be no voice at all anywhere from within ICANN other 
than those who would dictate to the world.  Gee, does that sound a bit 
fascist?  I do have a problem with those who claim to represent users at 
large, but do not do so.  I don't feel that Vittorio represents many 
users' views, nor does Esther.   Therefore, the ALAC does nothing for the 
at-large.

Now if we take this a bit further, all these committees are supposed to 
have some influence on who sits on the BOD.  How much does that matter if 
the BOD takes orders from staff instead of the other way around?  The 
whole thing is so topsy turvy, it is one huge sham that is destroying 
precisely what it is supposed to protect.  It is protecting that which it 
should be protecting against.

As for ruling the list, I am against censorship, but can understand 
admonishments for ad hominem attacks as long as they are even handed.  
Note that I said "admonishments."  Suspension for "useless" or 
unsubstantial posts?  That could cover many posters.

So, Stephane, what is your point?  If we are not "ready" for democracy are 
we to captiulate to autocracy?  I don't think so.  I think we need what 
you call the "trolls" and the vocal minority.  Many times, it is those 
vocal few individuals who really do speak for the majority of users.  
Perhaps not on this list, but in the world - at-large.  

The various attempts, as you called them, can't succeed because they are 
not funded.  It is not because they can't organize, IMO.  The corporation 
should have funded the at-large as it was, and allowed it to organize.  I 
really believe that it is because of ICANN's total lack of credibility and 
its efforts to undermine the at-large that has prevented any semblance of 
democratic evolution.  People are tired and have become apathetic.  ICANN 
has failed miserably.

Leah

P.S.  I deliberately did not address your first statement for obvious 
political reasons.  I felt that first sentence was unnecessary.


On 6 May 2003 at 9:46, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 05:30:03PM +0100,
>  Richard Henderson <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com> wrote 
>  a message of 143 lines which said:
> 
> > "ALAC, whose goal is to legitimitize the total elimination of public
> > representation on the Board of ICANN"... yep... the whole point of ALAC
> > is to minimise and contain the impact of the internet user community and
> > to
> ...
> > ICANN is regarded with disdain because it is perceived as a self-serving
> > clique of insiders, working on behalf of the US Government,
> ...
> > The comments of Jeff Williams were insubstantial.
> 
> I hope that nobody will accuse me of defending the US government or
> its front in Marina del Rey but you raise an important point: besides
> Jeff Williams' empty and useless contributions, there is the issue of
> "at large" involvment (I use lowercase to emphasize that I talk about
> the concept of "at large" participation, not the actual attempts by
> ICANN to organize it.)
> 
> IMHO, there is still no serious way to build a real democracy online:
> the various "at large" attempts are a proof by experience that the
> situation is not ready yet. This GA list is a typical
> example. Discussions are focused on the intense activities of a few
> trolls like Joe Baptista. Although some people like Vittoria Bertola
> and yourself try to stay calm and to express their views in a way that
> reasonable people could read and understand, and although these reasonable
> people are probably the majority, nervertheless, the debates revolve around
> a few jerks which are not connected to any actual practice.
> 
> Not having any responsability, they can work full-time sending
> messages on the GA list, screaming "censorship" and "fascism" at every
> possible opportunity.
> 
> I have no suggestions at the present time. I just wanted to
> acknowledge that the ICANN at least tried (and failed). I strongly
> hope that the idea of an Internet democracy will raise again and will
> be successful next time but I have no idea how.
> 
> > mentality which could be seen as institutionally fascist and arrogant.
> 
> Here, I agree with Vittorio: the real fascists are people who kill,
> torture and mutilate. They do not try to silence you by suspending
> your posting rights on a mailing list for two weeks. They shoot you
> right now. Calling the administrators of this mailing list "facists"
> is a insult to the victims of the real fascists. (It's like saying
> "genocide" for every murder: you blur the responsability of the real
> genociders.)
> 
> --
> 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
> 
> 



--
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