vote on "Sense of the Caucus" (was Re: [governance] Re: USG on ICANN - no movement here)

[McTim]

On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
>
>> Perhaps cultural norms differ, but around here, attacking straw man
>> arguments that someone else didn't make isn't a tactic that you use if
>> you could have made a real argument instead.
>
> John
>
> (With "around here" you mean 'in the US', right?)

I think he meant "on Internet mailing lists".

>
> So, you are attacking my culture now. Sorry to say this, but I think you are
> losing all sense of basic decency.

I think that you are a tad too sensitive.

>
> You may have a case that I am personally doing something undesirable or even
> obnoxious,  but what do you mean by "> Perhaps cultural norms differ, but
> around here,....".
>

see above. I took it to mean that on listservs "attacking straw man
arguments that someone else didn't make isn't a tactic that you use if
you could have made a real argument instead."

> You are basically saying that this particular "obnoxious-ness" may be in my
> culture.

see above.

>
> If I go to some other part of multi-cultural India and say - 'cultural norms
> differ, and I don't know how it is in your culture, but in my culture we do
> things sensibly and honorably' I am likely to invite mob violence.

Well, maybe that proves the point you have tried to attribute to him?

>
> I request IGC members to take note to the above utterance of John Levine,
> and give their views on it, before I mention how I characterize it,


too late, you have already characterised it!


because
> he seems to have friends in high places on this list and I need to guard my
> words much more than the regular list posters do.

yes, you do, see Bill's post about this.

Perhaps a useful way to move forward is to have a vote on a general
direction the caucus would like to move on this issue.  Since, thanks
to IGP folk, we have web voting possibilities, we can have multiple
choices, from this thread, we seem to have these general positions:

A) take the DOC at their word that they will never under
any plausible conditions relinquish their authority over the DNS root
and, hence, over ICANN, and that caucus efforts to change this will be
unproductive.

B) it's an inappropriate structure for a global network, whether
managed benignly or not. It has to change

C) it might be useful to see what could be done, in cooperation with
other interested stakeholders, to bring about that which should happen
no matter how much DOC says it won't.

D) Enhanced cooperation - EC

E) The IGF - clearly a multi-stakeholder body - which could have
possibly developed towards various possibilities of greater soft etc
power.

F) For the next review of the JPA, have list members tell the NTIA
how we could have rock solid guarantees of exactly the same levels of
security, stability, and control in the last instance as now.

G) for ICANN to move offshore, restructure, set up an alternative
authorisation structure with the UN, create another A root

H) ICANN MOU with the UN

I) terminating the JPA

J) internet can have multiple, consistent root systems

K) None of the above

L) ??

M)??

What have I missed (insert as L and M) ?

Of course, one could vote for as many of the above as one wanted.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
mctim.blogspot.com
____________________________________________________________
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