[governance] ICANN and the IGF

[yehudakatz at mailinator.com]

Vittorio | Veni,

I think Peter Dengate Thrush summed it up in a passing comment about the future
of Icann, in the 'Critical Internet Resources Session' on Monday November 12th.
 

Text:
http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF2-Critical%20Internet%20Resources-12N
OV07.txt

Video:
mms://200.160.1.20/igf1-ingles2.wmv

-

... "I think the first one is why I'm standing up.  The question early on was
about the new leadership of ICANN, is it going to be open to discussions.  And,
yes, absolutely.  Here we are.	Their commitment remains the same, to the white
paper principles.  We're looking at an industry-led, self-regulated, bottom-up,
transparent process for the coordination of the Internet resources.  And that's
going to continue under the new leadership, as you called it.  " ...

-

I feel his passage ..." We're looking at an industry-led, self-regulated,
bottom-up, transparent process for the coordination of the Internet resources."
...
sets out the oxymoron here.

Peter said: "industry-led" *NOT* "society-led"
This has always been the crux between the two philosophies.

This is the discord which got the ball rolling in the first place way-back-when
the IcannAtLarge formed, 
(YJ Park's Caucus was a by-product of that, and WSIS a post AtLarge event.
And I might also add: a scuttled 'Vote' in which 60k people participated and
Karls troubles in getting financile info from the Board.  etc. etc. ... )

So Peter has already said the Future is status-quo.

---
End
____________________________________________________________
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