Re: [wg-review] Straw Poll: IC Recommendation

["rob j" <junivers@sprint.ca>]

Sotiris, brave and patient list readers:

Please accept my apology for lack of time to participate more actively in
the last two months. It's hard to dodge all the very real battleships and
supertankers in the bay while paddling my little figurative canoe between
lobster traps...

If it matters, during the development of these discussions I have been
slowly changing my mind. When Karl first suggested the dissolution of the
DNSO, I thought it was the best solution, a brilliant spanking of the
complacent and an invigorating splash of cold reason, but now I'm thinking
the least-problematic approach is to form a stand-up Individual's
Constituency which could serve to better balance corporate (or governmental,
or criminal, or religious) greed against the same Individual rights so
easily denied in America's networks, and around the world.

> 1) The current proposal for recommendation of an Individual's
> Constituency in response to Resolutions 01.28 & 01.29 is generally an
> adequate reflection of widespread sentiment within the WG Review to
> date.
> [ X ]Support
> [  ]Reject
> [  ]Abstain
> Comments:

This seems to me the least disruptive way to go from "bad" to "not-so-bad."
The old folks won't get too nervous, and the kids will begin to see reason
supplanting idiocy/fear/greed in their parents more often.

>
>
> 2) The recommendation for "dissolution" of the DNSO should supercede the
> recommendation calling for an Individual's Constituency at this point in
> time.
> [  ]Support
> [ ]Reject
> [ X ]Abstain
> Comments:

Karl's recommendation appeals directly to my sense of cleanliness, rectitude
and propriety, and I believe it *should* be done, but slowly, and not in the
disruptive "chopping of heads," as has been portrayed. There are still too
few around the world, IMHO, who both trust the USG enough to participate in
this and many other processes, and understand the issues the DNSO was set up
to address (pardon the trailing pun) .

We obviously need the benefit of every available insight.

At this time I believe the DNSO is best rebuilt from within with an
Individual's Constituency--and clear guidance from without--on the basis of
simple survival. It's already become largely irrelevant--after all, the
Internet was designed to route around problems, and as much as the DNSO (or
ICANN, for that matter) is a problem, they are simply avoided.

So to me, the DNSO must adapt much more quickly so as to try to catch up to
the world (and to its own mandate). I think adding the IC is faster than
rebuilding the entire DNSO according to the facts we have in hand (instead
of what we were expecting to find twenty years ago), and still opens the
door to the more-effective management of domain name issues.

Hope this helps,

/R


--
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