Re: [wg-review] InternetCorporationAssignedNamesNumbers of CA, USA is it?

[Phil King <yofelipe@excite.com>]

Sotiris, I know I'm several days late responding, I've been sick, but this
is central to my being in ICANN, this wg, and putting out the effort to tell
friends to tell freinds the spin heads in the internet ezines are putting
only thier own spin on reports of results of ICANN actions.  It is for all
of us on the internet to work together to get the first step out of USG
control of the net structure complete, with the necessary
restructuring/modification tools in place to continue making the necessary
adjustments to struture at internet time.  All of this keeping it stable
both technically and financially.  It will also adjust to non-US centric. 
But only if more than "select" groups are served.  While being certain that
the corporate/commercial interest are there, It's a balance, there's nothing
easy about it, and this is the first time ANY of this has been done.

Ok, a little out of subject, a little late, and this is as real as it gets!

Phil in Butte
On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 19:39:20 -0500, sotiris@hermesnetwork.com wrote:

>  Karl Auerbach writes (excerpted from:
http://www.cavebear.com/icann-board/platform.htm#full-members)
>  
>  >"By avoiding even the use of the word "election" (and using "selection"
instead) the ICANN side-show artists are attempting to claim that there
isn't 
>  >even any voting going on - and you will note that the California statute
depends on people having a "right to vote"."
>  
>  I guess ICANN's only a California Corporation when they need to be... 
How'z it in OZ, Down-Unders?  Cheers mates!  :-)
>  
>  >"One has to be pretty silly, or stupid, not to recognize that there is,
in fact, an election going on.? But ICANN is depending on blind acceptance
of their 
>  >artifice. By placing the definition of the selection/election process
into a "plan adopted by Board resolution" ICANN is trying to claim that the 
>  >selection/election is not made "pursuant to a specific provision of a
corporation's articles or bylaws"."
>  
>  I wish to briefly address the issue of Karl's words "blind acceptance of
their artifice".  I care enough about the free flow of Information to
understand that 
>  the Internet is too important a thing to botch or clutter up.  I do not
wish to see a USG-Disneyland-Las Vegas-Hollywood-Dreamscape-Game-Brought-to-
>  you-by-Chrysler-Daimler version of the Internet.  I hope there are others
out there who agree with this sentiment, and frankly, I hope they are many! 
Of 
>  course, this is not to say that these aforementioned groups (Hollywood et
al.) do not have their place, they do, but they must know that it's just
that- one 
>  place among others, *many* Others.  The Internet serves diverse purposes
and functions, not simply those of "special interest" or ultimately minority

>  groups who currently wield clearly disproportionate power in its
decision-making processes and policies.  I think it's important that
everyone of us make no 
>  mistake that it's all about Information and who controls it's flow.  
>  
>  I care enough about myself to understand that there are others like me
out there who wish to have a voice in what will IN REALITY (not cybermyth)
affect 
>  ALL of US and OUR FUTURE.  I strongly suspect there are opposed groups
who would thwart individuals like myself, as these are contrary to their 
>  "special interests".  But, I know that if enough of US realize there's
strength in numbers- not *just* in FIGURES- we will have found our fulcrum
point.  
>  Numbers can generate figures pretty quickly. 
>  
>  >"This is a legal shell game that has no purpose except to evade the
clear intent of the California law and to eviscerate the rights accorded to
people 
>  >who are in all senses of the word, "members" of ICANN.
>  
>  Actually Karl, I don't think there's anything "legal" about it.  
>  
>  >"It is a shell game that should be stopped.
>  
>  The sooner the better.
>  
>  >"There are those who say that if ICANN has members that ICANN will be
subject to derivative lawsuits.? Iagree.? I believe that ICANN should be
subject 
>  >to derivative lawsuits - that is simply part of the cost of being
accountable.? ICANN can avoid being liable to such lawsuits simply by acting
properly and 
>  >conforming its actions to the dictates of law."
>  
>  I care enough about the workings of ICANN to understand that what is
necessary in the process of ICANN self-government, is that the Members (ALL
of 
>  them) realize the value of the Corporation to each of them individually,
and as a whole.  In fact, it is the responsibility of bona fide Members to
perpetuate, 
>  cultivate, and foster their common Project TOGETHER.  Otherwise, what
right does anyone have to be here at all, even at open invitation to this WG
(as 
>  it clearly was [YJ Park verified this already])?  Any claim to a right of
Opposition to such a Globally Public endeavour as ICANN, is clearly not in
the 
>  interests of the Global Public @Large.  
>  
>  >"One might also want to remember that the bulk of ICANN's expenses have
been to pay legal bills - and these costs have been incurred to create 
>  >precisely the kind of prejudicial rule that we've been talking about
here.? And since we, the Internet users, will ultimately bear ICANN's costs,
we will 
>  >ending up paying for the costs of our own disenfranchisement."
>  
>  How *do* those lawyers do it?  ;-)
>  
>  Just wanted to get all of that off my chest.
>  
>  Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>            Hermes Network, Inc.
>  
>  P.S.  How about the idea of a revolving, delegated, and dedicated
co-chair to tackle the issues for this WG?  Does anyone besides Dr. Michael
Gendron 
>  "think this makes good sense."?
>  
>  
>  --
>  This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
>  Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>  ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
>  Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>  


Yo, Felipe (I, Phillip)
Phil King
Butte America
(The Richest Hill On Earth)





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/


--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html