[bestbits] [governance] JNC's comments on ICANN oversight (non) transition

[Seun Ojedeji]

Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 28 Aug 2015 18:20, "Suresh Ramasubramanian" <suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
>
>
> One concrete proposal that civil society AND the technical community can
rally behind would be useful if we are not to damn the status quo and then
not propose any usable alternate proposal.
>

SO: Am afraid that may remain a dream even though I wish it can be
possible. Perhaps the first question is whether civil society within itself
have a consensus view? I will be surprised if the answer is yes.

Cheers!

> So far both proposals I reviewed here - while quite well drafted - are
still focused on the political considerations, and quite bare of technical
details.
>
>
> > On 28-Aug-2015, at 1:50 PM, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org>
wrote:
> >
> > Dear Parminder,
> > Thank you very much for sending these.  Other than one or two small
difference, I find myself almost fully in agreement.
> >
> > The ICG report, which supports the PTI proposal by the names community,
is utterly status quoist, and doesn't address the questions of jurisdiction
at all.
> >
> > In fact, it doesn't even call out the attempt by ICANN to ensure that
PTI will be US-based (a requirement listed in P1. Annex S).
> >
> > Regards,
> > Pranesh
> >
> > parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> [2015-08-18 18:38:31 +0530]:
> >> Just Net Coalition has submitted its comments to the process that is
> >> coming up with proposals for what was supposed to be the transition of
> >> ICANN's oversight from the US to a globally legitimate structure, but
> >> the - now more or less final - proposals on the table do nothing of the
> >> sort, and merely serve to cement the status quo.
> >>
> >> We have submitted our comments in two parts
> >>
> >> A overall political commentary can be found at
> >>
> >> https://comments.ianacg.org/pdf/submission/submission19.pdf
> >>
> >> A more technical response to finer issues and processes of the process
> >> is at
> >>
> >> https://comments.ianacg.org/pdf/submission/submission18.pdf
> >>
> >> In sum, we have firmly rejected both, the legitimacy of the process and
> >> the arbitrary manner in which it was conducted, and its result in the
> >> form of the final proposals on the table.
> >>
> >> parminder
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> >>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Pranesh Prakash
> > Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society
> > http://cis-india.org | tel:+91 80 40926283
> > sip:pranesh at ostel.co | xmpp:pranesh at cis-india.org
> > https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash
> >
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20150829/9ad5f344/attachment.htm>