[governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments

[Paul Lehto]

Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
specifically as to how ICANN drops below absolute minimum standards
for democratic governance.  Now you want to create an impression that
I can't or won't answer some unspecified question.  Is this your
hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?  If so, please
understand that even if you proved your apparent "case" that there are
difficulties of implementation in your (straw man) version of
democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old thing, most
especially an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of some
version of democracy.

It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:

Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or owners,
have the right to define and/or control or regulate the common life of
people on the Internet?  (On this question, Please note that the fact
that, in practice, the right to override an elected official's (or
their appointee's) decision under representative-democracy forms is
rarely exercised, as well as the notion that perhaps override ought
not to be often exercised, doesn't at all mean that there should be NO
RIGHT to so override when the "experts" decisions conflict with the
majority of more of the people. That distinction is the difference
between, by analogy, the ability to hire an attorney to represent
one's self, and the INABILITY to fire or replace the attorney no
matter what happens, which is the situation the people presently find
themselves in with ICANN).

To prevent the need for repeated questions, please don't read into the
above some detail that you personally deem outside the direct
management or control of democracy, since clearly ICANN does make
decisions of interest to the people, which is precisely why there's a
listserv entitled "Governance" that is not strictly by appointment or
invitation only.  Instead, assume that ICANN is making a decision
clearly triggering the interests of the people, and does so in a way
that is adverse to the perceived interests of a majority of people.

So, do you defend as rightful ICANN's apparent ability to do this
regardless of the opinions and the intensity thereof of the people?
If so, where does ICANN's power come from to run our common life on
the internet, or part of it, and why is it legitimate that they, above
all others, be able to do this within the domain they deem within
their territory?

I will answer your question if you will restate it. I thought I had
answered it. But your answer to the above questions will help
illuminate and perhaps resolve the real issues far quicker.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/14/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq at perry.co.uk>, at 18:55:12 on Sun, 11 Oct
> 2009, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> writes to Paul
> Lehto:
>
>>Would you care to have another attempt to answer my question?
>
> Apparently not.
> --
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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