Re: [wg-review] [TELECON] Disappointment.

[Eric Dierker <ERIC@HI-TEK.COM>]

Which scenario would be worse for the USG politicians and administrators:
a)    Letting ICANN continue to do a very poor job and letting ICANN take the
blame for any failures?
b)    Be responsible for taking over the governance and failing?
c)    Helping ICANN to be more productive and then taking the credit for any
success and/or denying responsibility for any failures?
    Even assuming good motives on behalf of the USG which one would you take?
If you are going to lobby, I suggest lobbying for money which can be used as a
carrot and benefit the constituencies.

Sincerely,

Derek Conant wrote:

> I am working with those who are determined to sponsor productive change on a
> global scale.
>
> Question:  Is it possible to disassemble ICANN and immediately put in place
> a better DNS management system?  You bet it's possible!
>
> ICANN's experience and its current relationship with the DoC has not
> guaranteed ICANN or its sponsors anything.  ICANN could be easily replaced
> upon the new US Administration's assessment of DoC policy and the ICANN
> model at any time.
>
> I founded and Chair the Domain Name System General Assembly (DNSGA) for the
> purpose of presenting a better global DNS management system to the US
> Government.  The DNSGA is working toward helping the US Government
> understand the importance and necessity of international DNS constituency
> representation and to counter ICANN's apparent arrogance regarding the
> subject.
>
> The problem that ICANN may have with the DNSGA model is that the DNSGA model
> allows for international DNS constituency representation to play a
> significant role in the direction of DNSGA for the formation of policy and
> international standards for a better DNS.
>
> How can anyone here be satisfied with an ICANN forum accomplishing only the
> venting of frustration with no change or productive movement forward?  The
> ICANN model appears in the way of global productivity and the progress of
> mankind.
>
> The DNSGA is taking the Bull by the horns here and we are going to
> accomplish international DNS constituency representation for a better DNS,
> with or without ICANN.  The DNSGA is not going to sit idle and allow ICANN
> to put significant matters affecting the DNS in a back room for debate or
> allow for an ICANN forum that accomplishes nothing.
>
> The DNSGA is an organization that is going to get the job done and we can
> use all of the help we can get.  If interested parties and the international
> Internet community is not willing to participate or contribute their
> opinions or comments, then how will any of us know where to look to solve
> the problems here?
>
> If you are interested in more details regarding the DNSGA
> (http://dnsga.org), please feel free to contact me anytime.
>
> Derek Conant
>
> Roeland Meyer wrote:
>
> > Which Senators are you working with? I am asking this as  US citizen.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Derek Conant [mailto:dconant@dnsga.org]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 9:00 AM
> > > To: sotiris@hermesnetwork.com
> > > Cc: wg-review@dnso.org; cctld-discuss@wwtld.org; dtreaty@dnsga.org;
> > > subscribers@dnsga.org
> > > Subject: Re: [wg-review] [TELECON] Disappointment.
> > >
> > >
> > > I do not think that the teleconference idea was a bad idea, however, I
> > > was
> > > beginning to wonder when someone here would mention disappointment in
> > > the
> > > scheduling of the teleconference.  In reviewing the teleconference
> > > related
> > > communication, it appeared to me that there was no focus, whatsoever,
> > > regarding
> > > the teleconference.
> > >
> > > I was also wondering what the parties here were going to
> > > discuss during
> > > the
> > > teleconference while subject matters have yet to be worked out through
> > > the email
> > > process.
> > >
> > > I suggest that matters be discussed via email until there is an agenda
> > > and until
> > > certain subject matters are crystallized.  Then hold a teleconference.
> > >
> > > Let's continue to discuss matters here via email and let's get back to
> > > business
> > > here so that I may accurately relay such information to the
> > > US Senators
> > > I am
> > > working with on proposing reform of DoC policy and ICANN.
> > >
> > > Derek Conant
> > >
> > >
> > > Sotiropoulos wrote:
> > >
> > > > I tried getting a line through some of the discount
> > > long-distance avenues
> > > > available.  Net2phone was having server troubles and I
> > > couldn't establish an
> > > > account, 1010620 & 1015945 resulted only in busy signals,
> > > and Bell Canada
> > > > wanted $1.37 /minute to put me through to Singapore.
> > > Through the last hour
> > > > and a half, I have tried to get a reasonably affordable
> > > line into the
> > > > teleconference, without success.  So... I just gave up!
> > > >
> > > > To be frank, if I have to absorb long-distance costs to
> > > share my ideas with
> > > > the WG via teleconference, then so much for a "bottom-up"
> > > approach.  I
> > > > think "bottoms-up" is *much* more appropriate.  My
> > > participation in the WG-
> > > > Review has already resulted in some considerable
> > > expenditure of my time,
> > > > resources, and energies.
> > > >
> > > > I wish to state, for the record, that I found this entire
> > > teleconference
> > > > *experience* to be quite an ill-conceived, hurried, and
> > > badly executed
> > > > exercise on the whole.  I am seriously disappointed.
> > > >
> > > > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> > > >           Hermes Network, Inc.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 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
> > > --
> > > 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
> > >
> > --
> > 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
>
> --
> 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

--
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