[governance] Re: [IGP-ANNOUNCE] IGP Alert: Reforming ICANN

[Lee McKnight]

OK, OK.

What I meant was 'not subordinated to anyone by IGP's proposal, that
ICANN has not already voluntarily agreed should play an oversight role.'


And yeah, as Milton noted, there is that IANA contract, which doesn't go
away just because of IGF having a soft, community-agreed, oversight
function.

Lee

Prof. Lee W. McKnight
School of Information Studies
Syracuse University
+1-315-443-6891office
+1-315-278-4392 mobile
>>> ca at rits.org.br 02/06/08 8:53 PM >>>
Wow, Lee, bold statement: "not subordinated to anyone". So I guess the
zillions of pages written on how and why Icann should free itself from
the US government was actually about how many camels fit on a pinhead...

Grande descoberta!

--c.a.

-----Original Message-----
From: "Lee McKnight" <lmcknigh at syr.edu>
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>,<avri at psg.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 17:43:50 -0500
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: [IGP-ANNOUNCE] IGP Alert: Reforming ICANN

> Avri,
> 
> I don't think we are talking about a radical change in IGF, more of a
> recognition of what de facto is already happening.
> 
> ICANN is not subordinated to anyone. ICANN has voluntarily
> participated
> in IGF from its founding, and organized sessions.
> 
> At those sessions, people have made positive and negative comments,
> and
> offered on-target and perhaps also off-target feedback to ICANN.
> 
> So we're just saying look at what's going on already at IGF, project
> ahead to where this is leading, and isn't that preferrable to keeping
> ICANN on a JPA leash indefinitely.  
> 
> Lee
> 
> Prof. Lee W. McKnight
> School of Information Studies
> Syracuse University
> +1-315-443-6891office
> +1-315-278-4392 mobile
> >>> avri at psg.com 02/06/08 5:16 PM >>>
> <currently under temporary part-time contract to the IGF secretariat 
> and an ICANN volunteer, but writing from my own perspective>
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I do not expect that the reason people might be against has to do
> with  
> laziness. I think it might have to do with the nature of the IGF as a
>  
> safe forum where everyone can meet to discuss the issues as peers,  
> including ICANN.  The IGP proposal would not only subordinate ICANN
> to  
> the rest of the peers, but would also force the group into becoming a
>  
> decision making body.  This would seem to me to be a radical change
> in  
> the nature of the forum.
> 
> Now, one could argue that the IGF should be a decision making body,  
> but most seem to believe that this is not what it was chartered to  
> be.  Also I expect that even if such were to be seen as a reasonable 
> step in a possible evolution of the IGF, and I am _not_ thinking it  
> is, it is certainly not a step that the IGF seems ready for.  At
> least  
> it does not seem that way to me.
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> 
> On 6 Feb 2008, at 22:05, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> 
> >
> > Some perceptive comments, Parminder.
> >
> > > So which is this IGF that wont like an ICANN accountable
> > > to it.... and why ?????
> >
> > The reason is that asking IGF to develop a process to review ICANN 
> > is like asking me or you to do calisthenics or go running every  
> > morning at 7 am. It is demanding work. It is far more comfortable
> to  
> > sleep. The requested subject may know perfectly well that
> performing  
> > this work is good for its health, and in fact may prolong its life 
> > for many years. But it still may not welcome the effort.
> > Milton Mueller
> > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
> > XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
> > ------------------------------
> > Internet Governance Project:
> > http://internetgovernance.org
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


____________________________________________________________
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

____________________________________________________________
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