<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Thursday 06 December 2012 07:08 PM,
McTim wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACAaNxhqrZcSWVpjbacg5RgTE0tVSWvt1kkAfmmXh9-5FzvMfA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 7:15 AM, parminder
<span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<snip></div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> One needs to do more
than say I/we are for "internationalising ICANN". That would
be merely rhetoric unless one is ready to present (and
engage with) a credible plan and roadmap, which all those,
whom Riaz may call as "US exceptionalists" and I often call
as "US apologists", have never done here. Have they ever? IF
they have, please point me to it. <br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Please see Drake's reply to you the last time we talked
about this. I don't have a link however.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
McTim, it is you who is advocating a particular kind on ICANN
internationalism, and therefore you must tell us the road map, at
least the outlines of it.... you cant vaguely refer to 'some email
of Bill Drake' and not remember what was it about. That is as a
strange a reply as I have ever got...<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACAaNxhqrZcSWVpjbacg5RgTE0tVSWvt1kkAfmmXh9-5FzvMfA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> No, it isnt enough to
say that the US should just terminate the ICANN contract
(including the IANA part) . One needs to propose under what
kind of arrangement will the new internationalised ICANN get
institutionalised and subsist. </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Why? Isn't a "free-floating" ICANN the next major step in
the ongoing evolution?</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Because nothing free floats without some kind of anchorage in a
polity...... But if you want to, you may describe your vision of a
free floating ICANN giving some details and we can discuss it. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACAaNxhqrZcSWVpjbacg5RgTE0tVSWvt1kkAfmmXh9-5FzvMfA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">One needs at least
framework level indications/ details. Would it still be
headquarter-ed in the US. If so what kind of immunities
would it have from US jurisdiction, and how will they be
ensured?</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Evolution means a series of minor changes, this would be
several steps down the road, and unless ICANN HQ is moved to
the moon (or perhaps a private island [we could call it
"Internetistan"] purchased with new gTLD monies) there will
always be a jurisdictional issue. Of course, if ICANN became
an IGO of the UN system then your requirements might be met,
but none of us ( I think) want an "intergovernmental only"
ICANN.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
So, you are saying that your version of 'internationalised ICANN'
will remain subject to US jurisdiction. Well, as you might suspect,
that is not internationalisation in my view. I cant see on what
basis you call it internationalisation... I would call it 'phoney
internationalisation'. As I have said often, one adverse decision by
a US court on an ICANN policy or action, and this whole phoney thing
will come unravelled. Why wait for it when we know it is around the
corner.....<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACAaNxhqrZcSWVpjbacg5RgTE0tVSWvt1kkAfmmXh9-5FzvMfA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> It is very central to
the internationalisation issue that neither the US executive
nor its courts are able to interfere with ICANN's decisions.
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It is central to your version of "internationalisation",
not to all versions.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
That solves the original problem which was your challenge to Riaz
(and your frustration that he hasnt taken your earlier challenges on
the same issue) to show to you anyone on the list who is against
'Internationalising ICANN' or rather who is an 'US exceptionalist'.
We see now that the simple fact is that you and Riaz mean very
different things when they use these expressions. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACAaNxhqrZcSWVpjbacg5RgTE0tVSWvt1kkAfmmXh9-5FzvMfA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It would be enough for the moment if we could get everyone
on the list to stop top-posting and trim your mails, that
would be a useful next step!</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
McTim<br>
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is.
A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>