[governance] Framework convention

[Karl Auerbach]

Alejandro Pisanty wrote:

 > the civil answer is that the storm of scandalous statements you have
 > subjected us to, including this last one, is in discord with fact.

I agree that the word "scandalous" is appropriate.  But rather than 
being applicable to my comments, it is more appropriate as a description 
of ICANN's abandonment of the public interest and its unconcern that the 
upper tiers of DNS efficiently, reliably, and accurately transforms DNS 
query packets into DNS reponse packets without prejudice for or against 
any query source or query subject.

There is certainly nothing inaccurate about what I have written.

ICANN has left internet users in the lurch and at risk of actual 
instability and failure of DNS.

ICANN has utterly abandoned its job to oversee that the root layer even 
operates at all, much less operates adequately.  We of the internet 
community have the current root server operators to thank for the 
stability we have had; ICANN is merely a bystander that is willing to 
take the credit.

The failure of ICANN to actually engage with the matters for which it 
was formed - to protect the technical stability of the internet for the 
benefit of internet users - should shame ICANN into action rather than 
into hand waiving denials.

The fact that ICANN has become a body that protects its industrial 
"stakeholders" rather then the community of internet users is also not 
dispelled by denials.

This is why ICANN should be used as a lesson in failure rather than a 
model for success.

         --karl--

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance