[governance] On CS I'net Gov. Caucus Response

[Milton Mueller]

>>> Veni Markovski <veni at veni.com> 08/14/05 5:58 PM >>>
>I don't see this as a "smoking gun". It's so normal to have such a 
>discussion, that there's nothing more normal than that. It's good that
>the governments have decided to start it. Finally:)

Veni,
I'd encourage you to look at this from the perspective of the people
who applied for the TLD. Not just the successful applicants for the .xxx
TLD, but _any_ applicant, for _any_ important award from ICANN, current
and future. 

What does it tell them? It says, you can play by the rules, wait five
years, do everything asked of you, invest tens or hundreds of thousands
of dollars, and get a favorable decision, and then....then someone
playing politics can pull the rug out from under you. They can change
the rules of the game after you've won because they don't like the
result.

No, Veni, if you understand anything about how policy making
institutions are supposed to work, the GAC's intervention is NOT a
healthy thing, not for ICANN, not for GAC, not for the industry, not for
users. And keep in mind that GAC itself had no vote, and we have no
evidence of the level of support or opposition within it. 

>Actually that's not the intent of the letter. It says 
>"the Board should allow time for additional governmental 
>and public policy concerns to be expressed before 
>reaching a final decision on this TLD." I'd like to make 

Your innocence astounds me. It really does. Please tell me: what is
going to happen in that "extra time?" It's very obvious. Governments who
don't like the result of the decision are going to politic to reverse
it. Of course those members are not asking directly to reverse the
decision. But that is what some of them want. And a delay will allow
them to work for it.

Let me ask you a question. Since you are an ICANN board member it is a
fair and legitimate one that you should be able to answer. Under what
rule or bylaw of ICANN is this request made? What authorizes ICANN's
Board to suspend and reconsider a decision it has already made just
because the GAC wants it to, and a significant number of its incompetent
members fell asleep for 5 years? Please, give me the by-law article and
section under which GAC or the Board is empowered to do this. 

Once you answer that question, here's another: If the At Large Advisory
Committee, or NCUC or Registrars constituency now comes up with a letter
to ICANN asking it NOT to break its rules and reverse a decision it made
what would happen then? Would the wishes of civil society and industry
be respected? 

>On the other hand, of course, having the governments request 
>a longer time for discussion, after 5 years of such discussion, seems
a >little bit delayed, but what can we do about it...better late than 
>never.

As an ICANN Board member with roots in the Internet industry and in
civil society, I'd suggest very strongly that you stand up for the
people who put you there and oppose this request by the GAC. ICANN
already has a legitimacy problem, and it has serious problems with
complaints about the arbitrary and capricious nature of its TLD decision
making processes. If you want fuel those flames and permanently alienate
another constituency or two, go ahead. But think twice, and think long
term.

--MM

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance