[governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking

[Jeffrey A. Williams]

Cosmin and all,

  I fear little if end users see instutional abuse as they
will vote with their feet, wallets, and PC's eventually unless
they are ignorant or scamed.  It is therefore the latter that
concerns me and our INEGroup members most seriously.  Such is
why as Eric, myself, Paul, and many others over the years
sense 1999 have been concerned about ICANN's behavior are
are more so today than in 1999.  This growing concern is in
part due to a lack of effectiveness of ICANN's and frankly
DOC/NTIA's oversight ability and authority as well as a
propensity to cater to big money interests over user and
small registrant interests for the sake of their (ICANN's)
own coffers nearly exclusively.

  From our point of view this mess is a product of poor
GNSO and ICANN ASO structure and individual professionalism.

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Cosmin L. Neagu" <cosmin.neagu at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 11, 2009 11:43 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking Audacity
>
>Hi everybody,
>
>I'm new to the list but the ICANN issue is of a philosophical interest
>to me for quite some time.
>
>You say that "one person one vote" might be a good option but in my
>opinion that is not nearly enough. We have some experience with this
>system and it is highly abusable.
>There are methods of "guiding" the opinion of the mases and they seem
>to work quite well. Even if the opinion of the majority was not
>perverted you still have potentially billions of people in the
>minority having to accept the majority decisions, however wrong they
>may be.
>
>In my opinion a just system would function like this:
>- ICANN, IETF or whatever would be in charge of developing a standard
>for a massive distributed system out of the possibility of control
>from any single entity or group of entities.
>  This system, let's call it DNS2 would be something like a DNS
>combined with a cryptographic key server and functioning without a
>root server.
>- a new registered domain/key/tag would be signed by the end user and
>would be automatically propagated into the DNS2 grid, any change would
>also have to be signed by the end user and would also be automatically
>propagated.
>- any user using DNS2 could check various nodes for the same
>information to be sure that he doesn't get different results.
>
>A system like this would be designed based on core principles of
>personal rights and would not delegate any authority to any central
>body.
>The central body would be able to run it's nodes to provide it's
>responses to the user queries and assure everybody that the system is
>not abused. Any country, university or private group could run it's
>own nodes to have it's own assurances.
>Nobody will ever have to vote and hope for the best or loose sleep
>because the mass media promoted their own interests and not the end
>user interests.
>
>I believe that we reached a point where the technology allows us to
>function as society without the need of creating massive nodes of
>delegated authority.
>Not only that but more, I believe that we reached a point where
>delegating authority and relying on these nodes of delegated authority
>is inefficient, slow and potentially dangerous.
>
>Regards,
>Cosmin L. Neagu
>
>On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>> [For those seeking the most concise general statement of the problems
>> and ideas I'm writing about, the original post at bottom is probably
>> the best several paragraphs to show that.] Now follows a brief reply
>> to Jeffrey Williams reply:
>>
>> The classic question of governance is:  What power will oversee the
>> exercise of Power?  And who oversees THAT power?
>>
>> When Roman commanders informed their legionnaires that they had hired
>> guards to guard the chastity of their wives while they were away on
>> military campaigns, the legionnaire's howls of laughter were so loud
>> they can still be heard occasionally through the centuries of
>> intervening history: They couldn't stop laughing in response to the
>> question of their commanders:
>____________________________________________________________
>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