[governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????

Michael Gurstein gurstein at gmail.com
Fri Oct 16 12:48:39 EDT 2009 

Since my casually tossed terms re: "diverse" and "suitable cadres" seems to
have entered into some sort of lexicological bestiary I think it may be
worth while teasing it out a bit...

To recall... I used that terminology in the context of the IGF evaluation
indicating things I saw as positive outcomes of the IGF.  One of the
positives I saw was that the IGF was creating (or partially creating and
partially eliciting) a cadre of people knowledgeable in the area of Internet
Governance.  As with most semi-technical or technical areas 	Internet
Governance is an area with a somewhat significant learning curve required to
become an actual "player" in the field i.e. one who can contribute
substantively to discussions and potentially to outcomes.

Having individuals who have been self-selected or designated (in some formal
process by a range of institutions including governments, civil society
etc.) as being IG people and then going through the process of
self-education in that area sufficient to contribute, is I think overall
useful especially since special interest groups (mostly the private sector)
spend considerable resources hiring and retaining such expertise.  Having
folks like Bill Graham formerly of the Canadian Government and now of ISOC
or the graduates from the Diplo IG course, I think all have made and are
making significant positive contributions to broad civil society objectives
in the IG context. 

My concern with this is that the range of those who are able to self-select
or be involved in programs such as Diplo's is rather too narrow (i.e. not
sufficiently "diverse") although the current initiative towards national and
regional IGF's will go a considerable distance to correcting this I would
hope.

Would that such developments were available in other reas of interest. If
suitable and diverse cadres of expertise were being developed in areas such
as for example, community informatics the current failure of most Universal
Access programs around the world to be anything other than agents for
providing subsidies to incumbent carriers would have been long since
overcome.

Best,

Mike   

-----Original Message-----rgrams 
From: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 8:54 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Bertrand de La Chapelle
Cc: Roland Perry
Subject: Re: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????


If there's not a democratic system of governance at ICANN, any such
"collision" of domain names or any other issue for that matter is purely a
matter for insider "experts" at ICANN and not the proper "domain" of anyone
on this list. If they wish to have anyone's
opinion, they will surely let us know.   ICANN has declared itself
"Independent" so to the extent anyone's opinion is even considered, it is
purely a matter (according to ICANN) of ICANN's grace in allowing us to do
so.  They just wouldn't of course call it "grace" but that's what it would
be.  They'd say they wished to invite a "diverse" and "suitable cadre" to
advise them.  Even Henry VIII would have said the same.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/16/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have seen in previous posts this reference to the possible collision 
> between .cym and the three letter ISO code for Cameroon. Did not chime 
> in then as the thread had continued on another topic, but I am a bit 
> puzzled here.
>
> If there is a problem, it's with the Cayman island (3-letter iso code 
> CYM), not Cameroon. As the Cayman islands are a UK territory, the 
> relevant national authority is the same as the Wales proposal, isn't 
> it ? Anyway, don't they already have a 2-letter ccTLD (kY is the 
> 2-letter ISO 3166 code) ?
>
> The issue may be real (there may be cases of possible collision) but 
> apparently the example does not work. Unless I'm mistaken which is 
> possible given that it was a rapid check. I may have just exposed my 
> insufficient knowledge ;-)
>
> I suppose the possible collisions will only appear in due course as 
> other proposals will be put forward.
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Roland Perry < 
> roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>
>> In message 
>> <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>,
>> at 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>
>>> Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>>>
>>
>> I had said everything I wanted to.
>>
>>  Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a 
>> decision will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups 
>> of people are on a collision course!
>>
>> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but 
>> it's an elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise 
>> in a congested name-space]
>>
>>   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.
>>>
>>
>> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend 
>> to resolve the 'collision' I described.
>>
>>  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?
>>>
>>
>> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would 
>> recommend made decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I 
>> described.
>>
>> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on 
>> this 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my 
>> original question.
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for 
> the Information Society Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et 
> Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de 
> Saint Exupéry ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting 
> humans")
>


-- 
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

____________________________________________________________
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