[governance] Re: [IGP-ANNOUNCE] IGP Alert: Reforming ICANN Oversight: A Historic Opportunity

[Milton L Mueller]

> In other words, you wont be able to change this from outside,  
> and won't be able to change this by operating within the IGF,  
> or submitting petitions and releasing position papers.  You need  
> to lobby DoC, and you need to lobby within ICANN.  Whatever  
> change will take place in ICANN, whatever decisions on ICANN's  
> governance get taken, will come from within ICANN and from  
> within DoC  - you are not going to find it easy or possible to  
> wrest control from DoC and reassign it to IGF. 
 
To say that there is no chance for movement or change in the status of
ICANN is flat wrong, and a measure of your own distance from the
political realities of the situation. (by the way, did you know that
there will be a new Presidential administration in the US by Sept.
2009?) 
 
It is rather odd to be lectured on tactics by someone who is both
completely removed from any of the relevant political activity (you are
not even part of icann meetings or constituencies)  and by someone who
does not really agree with our ultimate policy objectives. So rather
than posturing as someone offering practical advice on how to achieve
our objectives, why not just admit that you have different policy
objectives? (what they are is not clear, except perhaps support for the
status quo) 
 
If you want to discuss the value of the status quo, let's do so! It will
be a far more productive discussion. Tell us why a US Commerce Dept
Agreement with ICANN specifying a dozen or so policy priorities is a
good thing. Or tell us why the JPA should go away in Sept, 2009 with
nothing else to replace it. Offer us a critique of the specific reforms
IGP proposed for improving ICANN's accountability (or admit that you
haven't read the comments, which is probably the case). Tell us whether
you favor or oppose the specific changes in ICANN's independent review
process proposed by the OneWorld Trust. Tell us what you think of
ICANN's proposed "no confidence vote" proposal, and whether it is better
or worse than the one IGP proposed. 
 
Those would be worthwhile exchanges. What you've contributed so far, is
not.
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080206/1dd8794f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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