[governance] Rudeness tectics (was Re: Reinstate the Vote)

[Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law]

ICANN promiesed to review the UDRP but never did.  It would be wonderful 
if it could fix some of the errors in the procedural rules.

The substantive rules ought probably to be left alone as there's not going 
to be a consensus to change them.  But the procuedural rules are just 
sloppy, and could easily have several simple errors fixed.  (And, yes, I 
do have a a paper on that....)

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, Kieren McCarthy wrote:

>> You know, I think that's very unfair.  There were a number of
>> thoughtful analyses and reports around the time of the election by
>> a large number of groups.  Several were quite thoughtful - even the
>> ones I didn't agree with.
>
>
> Yes, quite true. Although I was thinking more of discussions around the
> issue by the community.
>
> In fact I've recently been reviewing some of the glut of reports that ICANN
> has thrown up over the years. Of most interest to me was John Palfrey's
> participation in ICANN paper, following by McLaughlin's response.
>
> I occasionally try to get Palfrey and Zittrain interested in ICANN again but
> I suspect they are still suffering the trauma.
>
> What's interesting is that some papers still seem relevant today and others
> sound like they're coming from a different era. I have a bundle of six on
> UDRP that are sitting waiting for me to wade through - I think one is yours.
>
>
>
> Kieren
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law
> [mailto:froomkin at law.miami.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 8:33 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kieren McCarthy
> Subject: RE: [governance] Rudeness tectics (was Re: Reinstate the Vote)
>
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, Kieren McCarthy wrote:
>
>> I've yet to see a calm discussion of the issue in seven years. In fact
> last
>> week's posts were the closest it has ever come to reasonable and rational
>> discourse.
>>
>
>
> You know, I think that's very unfair.  There were a number of thoughtful
> analyses and reports around the time of the election by a large number of
> groups.  Several were quite thoughtful - even the ones I didn't agree
> with.  (FWIW I wasn't a great fan of the electoral system, although Board
> Squatters were worse.)
>
> Unless of course you haven't ever read those reports?
>
>

-- 
http://www.icannwatch.org   Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin at law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                        -->It's warm here.<--
____________________________________________________________
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