[governance] Emergency resolution on .xxx recall

[Ray Plzak]

Adam,

Thanks for addressing the fact that Milton was conjuring up "black
helicopters".  

WRT the GAC -- the GAC has no way of dealing with any issue and/or making a
statement between its regularly scheduled meetings other than the Chairman
expressing concerns of various governments in a private letter.  Those
looking at GAC reform need to address the issue of how the GAC can act
between its regularly scheduled meetings.

Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance-
> bounces at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Adam Peake
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 5:03 AM
> To: Milton Mueller
> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] Emergency resolution on .xxx recall
> 
> >  >>> Izumi AIZU <aizu at anr.org> 08/17/05 11:07 PM >>>
> >>I quite disagree with the above characterization to GAC Chair,
> >>unless you have solid facts, it is not productive to assert these
> >>subjective observations into our analysis.
> >
> >I have many solid facts, but there is no need to personalize the issue,
> >I agree. Sharil is a very congenial and likable person. It is not my
> >concern here to praise him or condemn him. I simply am laying out what
> >happened.
> 
> 
> Milton, with respect, you are doing nothing of the sort. You
> presenting a conspiracy theory based on when letters are dated and
> attempts to bury correspondence (in the folder marked ...
> correspondence! The fools, we found it
> <http://www.icann.org/correspondence/>  :-)
> 
> Why would ICANN put a letter from NTIA on its front page? General
> correspondence from the US govt should be treated the same as that of
> any other stakeholder and stuck in "correspondence" (as ICM
> registry's letter is filed).  GAC isn't any other stakeholder, it's
> an advisor, I have no problem with seeing that advice on the front
> page.  I would have been much more concerned had ICANN given NTIA
> special treatment.
> 
> ICANN was to hold a board meeting on a particular date and as that
> meeting approached letters came in on issues on the meeting's agenda.
> There's a reasonable explanation for everything.
> 
> And you say Sharil's known for being close to the US and claim he has
> used his office as GAC chair to do the US govt's bidding. Of course
> you've personalized it.
> 
> This is an extremely important issue -- potentially goes to the heart
> of our concerns over any single govt. having a "pre-eminent role" in
> Internet governance, and govt. generally respecting multi-stakeholder
> policy processes.  At the same time we are trying to be taken
> seriously in WSIS, want the opportunity to contribute in a meaningful
> way to the ongoing discussions about the WGIG report. Conjecture and
> personal attacks are not going to help us.
> 
> Looking forward to a draft statement on this, but please stick to facts.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> >So let me clarify your position here, Izumi: are you saying that the US
> >Commerce Department and Sharil decided to send letters to ICANN within
> >one day of each other, asking for exactly the same thing, as a
> >remarkable coincidence? Are you contending that they did not coordinate
> >and communicate about this? Not a credible position, I'm afraid.
> >
> >>He might be aware of the US letter, but he was also siting
> >>"several other governments" and I am sure it is not only USG who
> >>are not happy with .xxx, those who are normally not politically in
> >>line with USG. Syria, for example, was quite angry at WSIS/WGIG
> >>meeting, for example,
> >
> >Of course, I have never denied that other governments were angry about
> >.xxx. As I have pointed out several times, they were angry in Luxembourg
> >and nothing happened. Once the US decided to act, things happened.
> >Sharil wrote his letter and the staff used it and the Board complied and
> >the applicant, seeing that it was all a done deal, went along with the
> >delay.
> >
> >I'll address the idea of a CS statement in the next message.
> >_______________________________________________
> >governance mailing list
> >governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
> 
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance



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