[governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments

[Roland Perry]

In message 
<23664951.1254514057829.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net
 >, at 15:07:37 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
<jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>  Yes they can, but unfortunately often do not.

So some can legitimately claim to act in the public interest. That's an 
advance on "none".

>Ergo one of many reasons why Paul's comments ring so indellably true.

I've never seen quite such a close linkage being made between public 
interest and elected politicians. After many elections around half the 
electorate won't find the politicians acting in their interest. Is there 
some benchmark for how much of the public has to have its interests 
served by the particular flavour of elected politicians, in the context 
of the remarks here?

>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>>Sent: Oct 2, 2009 1:44 PM
>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>>
>>In message
>><76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>>13:37:38 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>Although nonprofits are definitely much more public-interest minded, at
>>>the end of the day no nonprofit can legitimately claim to represent the
>>>PUBLIC INTEREST -- only democratically elected politicians can do that,
>>>and only if they are behaving correctly as well.
>>
>>So you don't think any charities can possibly act in the public
>>interest?

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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