<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City" downloadurl="http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place" downloadurl="http://www.5iantlavalamp.com/"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 77.95pt 1.0in 77.95pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> If ICANN continues
to present itself as the "merely technical"<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> organization<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> that it *should* be
(as opposed to the more general public policy<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> organization that
it increasingly *is*, as reflected in its tangible<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> policy<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> ambitions) I
predict you would get a much different response. ........ (snip)<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> The core problem is
that the official line ("we are only technical") is<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> not<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> of interest to the
general public, but the reality (*we make policy of a<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> more general
nature*) is of much greater interest to the general public.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> If ICANN were
honest in explicitly describing the full range of public<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> policy that is
deliberated under its roof, I predict it would get much<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> more<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> attention from the
general public. In a strange way I suspect that ICANN<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> doesn't really want
that attention, but if I am wrong and indeed it does<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> want that attention
it has not been able to get past its erroneous self<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> image to present
itself properly to the general public in order to get<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> that<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> attention.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> This is basically a
matter of institutional self-denial, either<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> intentional<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> or accidental, that
must be clarified in order to attract proper public<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> input into policy
making that the general public is increasingly<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> interested<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> in.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>Thanks Dan for an
excellent exposition of what you rightly describe as the 'core problem'. I will
like to recommend you for the CIRs main session to just put forward this simple
and clear formulation of the main issue or problem around CIR governance. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>>"Is you is, or
is you ain't" a *general public policy* organization, ICANN?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>I add my voice to this
central question. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>'to be or not to be' is something
ICANN must clearly decide on and come out publicly with - whether it is merely
a technical organization, whether it does public policy, if so, in what areas,
and with what legitimacy and representation. Can we as stakeholders and those
affected by ICANN's activities just ask ICANN to come out with a public statement
and white paper on this issue. All kinds of participation into ICANN processes
spoken of on this list can only follow such a statement, and an open discussion
around it. We would then at least know what are we participating in. for
instance, I myself have no intention to participate in any technical function -
which I find myself inadequate for, as also not interested in.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>On the issue of the public
policy issues ICANN deals with <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>>The point I'm trying
to make here is that if people knew that ICANN was >making policy that will
affect things they care about deeply like freedom >of expression and
personal privacy, etc., there would be a much higher >likelihood of
expanding interest in ICANN's work to more of the general >public.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>I will add 'development'
to the list. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>I mean, why<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> does a
"technical" organization even have an "intellectual property<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> constituency"
(in addition to the BC) in the first place? If it has that,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> how about adding a
"personal privacy constituency" (in addition to the<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>> NCUC) or a
"free expression constituency" etc., etc.?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>I will also add
'development constituency'.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>I have no problems with
ICANN that does only technical regulation and no public policy. Someone has to
do tech regulation and ICANN seems to have the people with tech expertise and probably
good systems in place as well. My problem is with the ICANN which does public policy,
in an underhand self-denying manner Dan describes.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>But, to take the issue
to the role of the wider CS engaged in IG issues, it is not enough to say ICANN
should not do public policy. Someone needs to do it, and if we are not able to put
our finger on who should, the nearest involved people/ organization will do it
by default, through action that may not be labeled 'public policy'. There
is no option to this – policy/power vacuums get filled automatically. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>And therefore if we say
ICANN shouldn’t so public policy, CS should puts its attention and energy
to figure out who should. Keep the Core Neutral campaign seem to suggest that
national governments should do it, but I think this is not an adequate solution
for at least two reasons.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>(1) in the information society
there are many, an ever increasing number of, issues that defy national boundaries
- IPR and trademarks, content, e-commerce, cyber crime etc etc...<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>(2) in a spirit of
global solidarity, civil society has always looked at international instruments
- of soft as well as hard law - to ensure human rights - civil, political,
social and economic. Pushing the domain of Internet public policy exclusively to
national domains will not be right, and not in civil society's interest. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>We should instead look
at the necessary global Internet public policy processes, and seek to influence
them towards our cherished objectives. The dynamic coalition on 'framework of
principles for the Internet' attempts to engage with such processes, and also
seeks to initiate a civil society led process for starting to develop a
framework of public policy principles that should be adopted globally. In absence
of such principles and public policy processes, either ICANN continues to do
Internet public policy or we have completely statist versions operating within
different national domains, which defeats many of the basic purposes of the
civil society to get together for a world summit on the information society,
and try to stick together thereafter.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>Best<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>Parminder <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Parminder Jeet Singh<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>IT for Change, <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Bangalore</st1:place></st1:City><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>www.ITforChange.net <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> -----Original Message-----</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> From: Dan Krimm [mailto:dan@musicunbound.com]</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 11:23 AM</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> To: governance@lists.cpsr.org</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Subject: [governance] ICANN ads for "general public"
(new subject header)</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> At 3:48 PM -0400 9/7/07, veni markovski wrote:</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >At 12:31 9/7/2007 -0700, you wrote:</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >>The ads must be well-designed and properly placed to be
effective. My</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> call</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >>is for effective ads, not just any old ads.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> ></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >Then Adam Peake should respond to this ;)</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> I'll be interested if he does.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> The ad that he provided as an example appears to be incoherent
when one</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> evaluates the combination of audience targeting, strategic
messaging and</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> media placement (these considerations are completely
interdependent and</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> cannot be separated from one another -- they must be evaluated as
a</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> package).</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Anyone who has ever worked at an authoritative level in the
advertising or</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> marketing profession (like, say, at an ad agency in a
creative/strategic</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> role, or perhaps in the publishing/ad-sales/marketing department
of a</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> print</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> periodical [not the editorial department], or perhaps even in a
media</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> placement service) would recognize this example as systematically</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> unprofessional (as long as they were brought up to speed on the
full</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> details of ICANN's activities and the specific goal of such an
ad).</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >>Bottom line: This example does not prove that there is no
audience for</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >>ICANN's work, only that the ad was flawed.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> ></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >You see, the problem is that you can't forever deny the fact
that</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >generally people are not interested in ICANN. This time you
don't</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >like the ads, next time you wouldn't like the newspapers they
would</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >be published at, etc., etc. While the simple fact, which
Kieren</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> >mentioned will continue to be a fact.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> This "simple fact" appears never to have been properly
tested in the first</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> place, at least according to the evidence of the ad presented
here. If</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> the</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> whole ad process is executed properly and professionally, then I
won't</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> object if the response continues to be weak. But as long as
the ad</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> process</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> continues to be similarly unprofessional, you really can't tell
anything</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> about the audience response. It's as if you spoke to someone</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> unintelligibly, and interpreted a non-response as stupidity or
lack of</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> interest instead of your failure to communicate.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> I will only complain when the process is flawed. This
example was clearly</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> flawed, and any competent advertising professionals can confirm it
for</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> you,</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> if they know enough about ICANN and the policy domain it genuinely</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> addresses (as opposed to the policy domain it clams to address</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> officially).</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> The point I'm trying to make here is that if people knew that
ICANN was</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> making policy that will affect things they care about deeply like
freedom</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> of expression and personal privacy, etc., there would be a much
higher</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> likelihood of expanding interest in ICANN's work to more of the
general</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> public.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> If ICANN continues to present itself as the "merely
technical"</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> organization</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> that it *should* be (as opposed to the more general public policy</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> organization that it increasingly *is*, as reflected in its
tangible</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> policy</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> ambitions) I predict you would get a much different
response. I mean, why</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> does a "technical" organization even have an
"intellectual property</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> constituency" (in addition to the BC) in the first
place? If it has that,</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> how about adding a "personal privacy constituency" (in
addition to the</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> NCUC) or a "free expression constituency" etc., etc.?</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> The core problem is that the official line ("we are only
technical") is</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> not</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> of interest to the general public, but the reality (*we make
policy of a</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> more general nature*) is of much greater interest to the general
public.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> If ICANN were honest in explicitly describing the full range of
public</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> policy that is deliberated under its roof, I predict it would get
much</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> more</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> attention from the general public. In a strange way I
suspect that ICANN</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> doesn't really want that attention, but if I am wrong and indeed
it does</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> want that attention it has not been able to get past its erroneous
self</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> image to present itself properly to the general public in order to
get</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> that</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> attention.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> This is basically a matter of institutional self-denial, either</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> intentional</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> or accidental, that must be clarified in order to attract proper
public</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> input into policy making that the general public is increasingly</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> interested</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> in.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> "Is you is, or is you ain't" a *general public policy*
organization,</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> ICANN?</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> This confusion of mission and identity is at the core of all of
these</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> problems. And frankly, if this isn't sorted out then whoever
designs the</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> ad campaigns doesn't have the full ability to put together an
effective</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> general-public ad campaign, because superiors would be
constraining (and</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> importantly distorting and thus undermining) the message they
would allow</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> to be included in any ads.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> This a "double-bind" situation, and it is systematically
dysfunctional.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> It</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> is quite possible that the failure of the execution of the ad
campaign is</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> simply a reflection of that institutional dysfunction,
systematically</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> obstructing the professionalism of the ad campaign.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> Dan</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> ____________________________________________________________</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> governance@lists.cpsr.org</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> For all list information and functions, see:</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>