[governance] Emergency resolution on .xxx

[William Drake]

Dear Milton,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller at syr.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 12:03 AM
> To: wdrake at cpsr.org; wdrake at ictsd.ch; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] Emergency resolution on .xxx
> recall-andthedestruction of ICANN's integrity
>
>
> A nice academic interpretation from 4,000 miles away.

4,000 miles away from what? I'm right here. Or does one now need to be in
center of the universe to have a view on US policy?  You're what, 500
miles away from DC, and hence less academic?

> What you fail to take into account is the appointment of a new Deputy
> Secty of Commerce. In my humble opinion, this wouldn't have happened if
> a guy from Arlington TX with a Ph.D. from the Abilene Christian
> University wasn't put into Ted Kassinger's place on July 22.

I wasn't failing to take anything into account.  I *agreed* with you that
domestic politics are key here, so what's with the pedantry?

> What evidence is there for your interpretation? Read Gallagher's

Um, listening to the public statements of and talking privately to
government representatives, including US government representatives, here
in Geneva, 4,000 miles away.

> letter. There is not a single reference to the concerns of other
> governments.
> http://www.icann.org/correspondence/gallagher-to-cerf-15aug05.pdf
>

Not a single reference, other than this:  "We also understand that other
countries have significant reservations regarding the creation of a .XXX
TLD."

Bit perplexed at your reaction, but again, whatever the relative weight of
domestic and international factors may be (I guess you think it's 100/0%
while I suspect it's more like 65/35%---who cares), I said I share your
concerns here.  And I would support any collegially organized initiative
you undertake to call attention to the problem.

Best,

Bill

> >>> wdrake at cpsr.org 08/16/05 4:28 PM >>>
> Hi,
>
> I agree with Milton's concerns but would offer just one small amendment
> to
> his explanation.  While right wing politics within the US are indeed a
> driving factor, international considerations may play a larger
> supporting
> role here than he suggests.  It's really a perfect storm, game
> theoretically a case of harmony.  Many governments want to express
> righteous indignation, nobody can lose, their silence prior when it
> was
> raised in ICANN notwithstanding (one almost wonders if they were
> actually
> asleep at the wheel then, or were waiting to play a more clever game).
>
> Now with the WGIG/WSIS process going on, XXX has become the supposed
> poster child example of a system run amuck and in need of greater
> government oversight. It was invoked repeatedly at WGIG release event.
>
> And given its own domestic scene, the US government is willing to hand
> governments a symbolic victory and nominally demonstrate a new
> responsiveness to global concerns---convenient timing since it refuses
> to
> consider more substantive changes.  Apparently there is no major worry
> about setting precedents and compromising ICANN's position.
>
> There's a couple of ways to read this.  Not entirely obvious who's
> being
> clever or daft.
>
> Best,
>
> Bill
>





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