[governance] IGC on its list

[kpeters at tldainc.org]

Eric,
      You were not denied membership. You were misdirected in how to  
apply. I asked David to direct you rather to the application system on  
the website whereby you should be fully included in the system when  
your application is accepted and ID properly sent in AFTER acceptance.  
I know of your interest and am awaiting your application.

-Karl E. Peters

Quoting Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>:

> Karl,
>  
> Why was I denied membership?
>
> --- On Tue, 7/7/09, kpeters at tldainc.org <kpeters at tldainc.org> wrote:
>
>
> From: kpeters at tldainc.org <kpeters at tldainc.org>
> Subject: Re: [governance] IGC on its list
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Date: Tuesday, July 7, 2009, 2:07 PM
>
>
> While there is certainly room for difference of perspective, it   
> seems to me that ICANN has met every demand for greater   
> accountability or openness with a new layer of bureacracy or other   
> evasize tactic that resulted in no real openness or change in basic   
> operation. It is not hard to tell it was spun off from government!   
> :) Personally, I can not immagine why anyone outside the US would   
> want to stay under it when there is no real reason they should have   
> to. The ccTLDs are certianly a factor, but those are owed to every   
> nation regardless of fees paid to ICANN. I doubt China will have .cn  
>  removed in protest of their setting up their own root!
>
> In order for a group like this to have relevence in the age of   
> multiple primary roots, this list and the body that sponsors it   
> should look at establishing rules and best practices that are to be   
> advocated for as many roots as possible and not just administered   
> through ICANN. As ICANN loses its relevence/significance by   
> inability to compete anywhere their service is not mandated by   
> government, all the work to get something through the ICANN labrinth  
>  will have been an unsatisfying use of time and energies looking   
> back. Whereas if you have developed good general guiding principles   
> that perhaps other roots would apply, you would give those roots a   
> chance to win consumer confidence by willing applicatiuon of your   
> practices and thus put pressure ICANN has never faced before to meet  
>  the market expectations if it wishes to remain a force in the   
> community.
>
> One of the greatest challenges forseen in the eventuality of a more   
> divided system of roots is the coordination of Top Level Domains   
> (TLDs) the "inclusive" name space, the whole of the TLDs running in   
> any and all operative roots. This was first a widely recognized   
> problem with ICANN's theft of .biz from a profitable operation that   
> was very actively running it, to give it to someone who would pay   
> them hefty fees and run it in their root. They got away with it that  
>  time, in spite of untruths by Vint Cerf in his testimony before the  
>  US Congress (available in audio at www.tldainc.org) but now, as ONE  
>  OF the roots, not just THE GOVERNMENT root, they should have to   
> consult further than just the US government about any particular   
> string before its implementation. There must be a way to coordinate   
> such research with a complete and updated reference of all active   
> TLDs in any operational root. With the re-organization of the TLDA,   
> there is a beginning for this
>  underway. We would welcome your members here as guests to see what   
> we are working on and toward. Perhaps the breadth of your   
> experiences would help in making determinations and best practices   
> of our own.
>
> There will almost certainly be an outburst from one of this list's   
> participants within hours of my post to tell you we are not ready   
> nor properly run; but just consider the source and decide for   
> yourself. Come visit the site at www.tldainc.org and ask some   
> questions. Hard questions are welcomed!
>
> Perhaps those of you with this type of perspective or interest can   
> begin to blaze the trail for the remainder of the organization here   
> to follow, whether ultimately with the TLDA or not. At least the   
> conversation is started. We have a public list serve for those who   
> wish to discuss these issues more clearly without tieing up this   
> list too much. Just bring your findings back from time to time and   
> share your wisdom and experience with us as you can.
>
> -Karl E. Peters
> k.peters at tldainc.org
>
> Quoting Rui Correia <correia.rui at gmail.com>:
>
>> Dear Bill and Karl
>>
>> I really think it is time that once and for all we deal with the ICANN issue
>> and look at mechanisms to replace it with a representative, independent
>> body. We gone around n circles for years over this matter, but like a
>> tumour, we have to decide to have the courage to undergo srgery to remove it
>> or fool ourselves that it will not do much harm.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Rui
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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