[governance] new TLDs?

Mon Aug 29 11:14:24 EDT 2005

Milton

It's hard to see motives being questioned of someone who might have
a different idea of how Internet governance should be carried out,
rather than trying to identify what the difference is and acknowledge
that there are significant differents.

There is a real need for a serious discussion on this list, and a
response like Milton's instead seems to be aimed at intimidating such
a discussion.

I don't know if "most believe that competition, diversity and
muiltilingualism will require some new TLDs."

The problem I have with the statement, Milton, is that is Internet
governance and the future of the Internet about what a very small
group of people believe?

The idea of "competition" in the governance of the Internet, regardless
of what any small group of people believe, is not necessarily what
public interest considerations of the present and future of the Internet
would determine as needed.

Also there seems a serious problem with the following statement that you 
have made:

  One can only wonder, then, about the priorities and logic of someone who
> supports top-down intervention by governments to bring about an outcome
> that he wants but most people in the process don't want.
>

Carlos is in the process. His views need to be heard, rather than there
being an effort to intimidate or dismiss them on other than reasoning.

The very small group of people who have financial or other support making
it possible for them to be in this process is already too small to be
narrowing down the set of already narrow views that are being considered
by the view who are able to go to the various meetings around the world.

This mailing list would serve the whole process of trying to contribute
to the discussion on Internet governance if it were possible to have a
broad ranging discussion of the issues so the salient issues could be
determined.

Instead the issues get narrowed and even within this narrow focus,
any but the narrowest views are welcomed.

Those who dare to express something different are either ignored, or
get statements that their views don't belong.

The issues I tried to raise of the need for an online process welcoming
netizen input into any forms created for managing the infrastructure of
the Internet were dismissed.

Now there is an effort to claim that Carlos's views should be dismissed
as they are not the views of others like you Milton, and that one has
to also question any other ideas he might have.

Well, this is a mailing list that is open, not a closed list for
those with the set of narrow views that Milton claims are only those
allowed.

So let the discussion open up, don't shut it off please.

Thanks

Ronda

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Milton Mueller wrote:

> It's good to get a frank admission from Carlos that he's basically 
> against any new TLD proposal.
>
> This is a position that has some supporters, but only a very small 
> minority of those who have considered it. Both civil society organs 
> within ICANN (ALAC and NCUC) have adopted resolutions taking the 
> opposite position. Most believe that competition, diversity and 
> multilingualism will require some new TLDs.
>
> One can only wonder, then, about the priorities and logic of someone who 
> supports top-down intervention by governments to bring about an outcome 
> that he wants but most people in the process don't want.
>
>>>> Carlos Afonso <ca at rits.org.br> 08/29/05 10:00 AM >>>
> If all this means doom to the gTLD business religion, yes, I will be
> very happy!! Have anyone noticed the Internet can run very easily with
> any combination of these letters, or just with ccTLDs, as long as you do
> not touch the numbering infrastructure?
>
> In the meantime, I thank Milton for doing srhink work on me for free 
> ::))
>
> --c.a.
>
> Milton Mueller wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>> Perhaps it's because you're an expat American, but you seem to be the
>> only person on the list who understands the implications of this. I hope
>> people are reading what you said below. People who talk about how much
>> they like the "flexibility" of ICANN because it responds to last-minmute
>> political pressures are going to find out what that really means. And
>> people like Carlos who _think_ they are happy because the US is exerting
>> pressure to do what it wants this time, will learn the hard way, too,
>> not to abandon principle for expediency.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> wdrake at cpsr.org 08/24/05 11:31 AM >>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> I would not be at all surprised if, having gotten a taste with the
>>>
>>>
>> highly
>>
>>
>>> useful .xxx controversy, America's christian right starts poking
>>>
>>>
>> around in
>>
>>
>>> other bits of Internet governance in search of high yield targets.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> governance mailing list
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Carlos Afonso
> diretor de planejamento
> Rede de Informações para o Terceiro Setor - Rits
> Rua Guilhermina Guinle, 272, 6º andar - Botafogo
> Rio de Janeiro RJ - Brasil         CEP 22270-060
> tel +55-21-2527-5494        fax +55-21-2527-5460
> ca at rits.org.br            http://www.rits.org.br
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance