[governance] JPA - final draft for comments
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
isolatedn at gmail.com
Thu Jun 4 05:38:42 EDT 2009
Hello Parminder
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>wrote:
> I can go with the present text. However I will request the co-coordinator
> to give the following serious consideration.
>
> I feel that the strength of the opinion on this list that 'JPA should end'
> is so high that it is not adequately represented in the phrase 'Some of us
> believe the JPA should be ended now.....'
>
> I agree with Sivasubramanian's suggestion that a phrase like
>
> "though there isn't an absolute consensus, the predominant opinion is in
> favor of (immediate) ending the JPA" (I added 'immediate' to Shiva's
> language)
>
> represents the exchanges on this list much better.
>
Thank you. Infact you later suggestion that the wording could be "JPA should
end and a we agree on an MOU for a transition'. is even better.
>
>
> In fact it may even be useful to add a phrase that "those few who have
> reservations on immediate ending of JPA also have it only on technical
> grounds, mindful of possible dangers of creating a vacuum as new
> arrangements are finalized".
>
> This will, in my view, give a clearer picture of IGC's views on JPA.
>
I have some reservations. This paragraphs points to divisions within the
Caucus that are not yet defined. In any group, the views of the majority are
taken as voted, and once taken what is passed is deemed the views of the
WHOLE group. At that stage we don't say that 80 people voted for, and 20
against. 1) It is not necessary to talk about internal differences in an
opinion that goes out to be published and 2) "possible dangers of creating a
new vacuum as new arrangements are finalized" creates enough of an alarm to
discourage ending of the JPA,. so this statement whether expressed as the
opinion of the group or even as one or two members, is negative.
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>
>
> Parminder
>
>
> Lee W McKnight wrote:
>
> likewise, fine by me
> ________________________________________
> From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 5:51 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeanette Hofmann; governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
> Subject: AW: [governance] JPA - final draft for comments
>
> I dod not much contribute to the debate but I can live with the latest version. It has my support.
>
> Wolfgang
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu <jeanette at wzb.eu>]
> Gesendet: Mi 03.06.2009 23:03
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
> Betreff: Re: [governance] JPA - final draft for comments
>
>
>
> Hi Ian, I fully support this new version.
> jeanette
>
> Ian Peter wrote:
>
>
> One additional add on to my last message - the following text -
>
>
> Irrespective of when the JPA actually ends however, the IGC believes that it
> should be replaced by a new global, multistakeholder accountability
> framework, the development of which should commence in early 2010 (I would
> prefer : "as soon as possible"), in an open, transparent and inclusive
> process."
>
>
> So the newly included text would read
>
> The IGC firmly believes that global co-operation will be enhanced by a
> transition beyond the JPA to a situation where all stakeholders feel that
> they have equitable arrangements for participation, that ICANN is subject
> to due process procedures and is accountable to all stakeholders. Therefore,
> the IGC believes that merely extending the current JPA arrangement is not a
> lasting viable solution.
>
> Some of us believe the JPA should be ended now, as it is an ineffective
> mechanism to deal with the problems that must be resolved to place ICANN on
> a viable long-term path forward. On the other hand, some of us believe that
> a time-limited extension of the JPA might be the
> most effective means to ensure that ICANN does take on board necessary
> changes.
>
> Irrespective of when the JPA actually ends however, the IGC believes that it
> should be replaced by a new global, multistakeholder accountability
> framework, the development of which should commence as soon as possible in
> an open, transparent and inclusive process.
>
> What do you all think ? In or out?
>
> Ian
>
>
>
>
> On 4/06/09 5:22 AM, "Ian Peter" <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I think by now it must be obvious to anyone who is reading as well as
> writing that there are strongly held opinions on both sides of this argument
> - but also that, on both sides, people feel there is a danger for IGC to
> express the other side!
>
> Which is why I dropped the text altogether, and that still may be the only
> way forward. However, for one last try to get something we are happy to say
> about JPA, how does this sit.
>
> The IGC firmly believes that global co-operation will be enhanced by a
> transition beyond the JPA to a situation where all stakeholders feel that
> they have equitable arrangements for participation, that ICANN is subject
> to due process procedures and is accountable to all stakeholders. Therefore,
> the IGC believes that merely extending the current JPA arrangement is not a
> lasting viable solution.
>
> Some of us believe the JPA should be ended now, as it is an ineffective
> mechanism to deal with the problems that must be resolved to place ICANN on
> a viable long-term path forward. On the other hand, some of us believe that
> a time-limited extension of the JPA might be the
> most effective means to ensure that ICANN does take on board necessary
> changes.
>
> Irrespective of .....(etc - back to principles text here)
>
> What do you think? Will that work, and are we better off with or without
> this additional text?
>
>
>
>
> On 4/06/09 4:57 AM, "Jeanette Hofmann" <jeanette at wzb.eu> <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
>
>
>
> Sorry but I disagree. While I recognized that the IANA contract provides
> another leverage that could be used to get some form of external
> accountability framework established, I don't see why this implies that
> one should the JPA expire just like that. I firmly believe that external
> accountability is necessary for ICANN, and I havn't changed my mind on
> that. The fact that the US industry has other reasons to opt for an
> extension also won't change my mind.
>
> jeanette
>
> Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
>
> This is an illogical position. No meaningful changes can take place
> before the JPA ends (in three months!). If you want the US not to let
> go before meaningful accountability mechanisms are in place, then
> talk about the IANA contract. That focuses people's minds.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Jeanette Hofmann
> [mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu <jeanette at wzb.eu>]
>
> The point is not whether or not JPA provides accountability. The
> point is to replace the JPA by something that promises to provide
> accountability - and, AFAIAC, to get this something in place before
> the JPA ends.
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________ 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
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090604/3438dee8/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list