[governance] ICANN RFC on its performance

[Karl Auerbach]

Veni Markovski wrote:

Your comments prove my point - that mechanisms of openness, 
transparency, and accountability must be built into institutions of 
internet governance at the genetic foundation level else they will be 
excused, avoided, vitiated, and replaced with placebo substitutes.

You continue to assert that ICANN has changed.  OK, let's hold a real 
election to see what the internet community says.

What would be more demonstrative that a body of internet governance is 
responsive to ask the opinion of those for whom that body is intended to 
serve?

I am not afraid to put that question before the community of internet users.

Indeed, it would be a good principle of internet governance to require 
every such body to demonstrate, by a concrete question posed to the 
internet community, that the body has continued reason to exist.

I would suggest that in ICANN's case the outcome, outside the circles of 
trademark lawyers and registry owners, would be most uncertain.

On another point: You have never even tried to explain why ICANN has 
chosen to hide, much less is justified in hiding, an official written 
communication made by a sitting director to the full board made during a 
public meeting.

Do you believe that bodies of internet governance should be empowered to 
manipulate their histories and official documents?

To continue:

>> Recommendation: All meetings of the Board of Directors and of its 
>> committees should be audio-recorded and made available to the public. ...

> Karl, four points here:
> a) Would you agree that some people, who are non-native English speakers 
> may have problems having their words recorded?

A famous line in US politics is "If you can't take the heat, get out of 
the kitchen."

If a person on ICANN's board or committee can not make decisions in a 
manner which allows the internet community to observe, to provide input, 
to provide corrective guidance, and ultimately be called to account, 
then that person should immediately resign.

Your arguments for secrecy in ICANN remind me of the claims of my own 
President when he locks people up in foreign jails for indeterminate 
period and without even the protections the civilized world began to 
accept in the year 1215.


You wrote:

> I don't see anything amusing going always into your case against ICANN. 
> This happened long time ago, and one of the signs ICANN has changed is, 
> that the next directors didn't have the problems you've had.

Why am I often making negative comments on ICANN?  The reason is that 
there is so much about ICANN that is worthy of negative comment.  Those 
negative matters have existed, and even gotten worse, during the 9 years 
of ICANN's existence.

Today is mother's day - so let's use that as a context for an example: 
Suppose a mother were to tell her child that it is bad to run with 
scissors?  Do you think that the child should turn on her, rejecting her 
advice, and assailing her intent on the grounds that such advice was 
given to children in prior days and is thus inappropriate?

			--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