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

Mon Oct 19 12:12:19 EDT 2009

OK, you're informing me that you're listening Roland.  You wish to
evaluate my *specific* proposal for democratic governance, and
"challenge" me to do so.

But, what's your option or recourse, Roland, in the event you don't
get a "satisfactory" specific "suitable" democracy proposal in your
inbox *from me*? Or from someone else?   Is the plan then to go with
autocracy, oligarchy, plutocracy?   See, I'm happy with any form of
real democracy, and if you don't have the option to walk away from
democracy AND remain politically legitimate (you don't), I've got no
incentive to do free work for you that just shifts the spotlight from
ICANN illegitimacy and rendering us all, literally, political slaves:
"someone subject to the political will of another."  That's the result
of removing the democracy-connection.

You've been very hesitant to say any express negative words about
ICANN.  Perhaps this is why I somewhat repeat myself, thinking:
"Perhaps I've not made myself clear to Roland that there's no way to
go that's legitimate but democracy and ICANN "independence" isn't even
remotely democratic accountability."

So again, if you're not advocating for anti-democracy of some sort
(and I don't hear anybody else publicly support this) I am quite sure
that with the support of literally ALL OF US, or quite close thereto,
we could figure out a way to make internet democratic governance work
-- at least given some centuries of experience at varying levels in
substantial portions of the world, the governance knowledge for
designing elections systems ought to be there, no?

If indeed you are, or become, one of the vaunted ICANN advsisors or
stakeholders, can we rest confident that you'll be speaking
democracy-truth to ICANN power?   (Not publicly, anyway, as this list
evidences, and as to privately - we'll never know...)

This is a VERY clearcut issue on which USG DOC / ICANN are dead wrong.
 And there is no class of legal issue, rights issue, human rights
issue, or political justice issue that ranks any higher than the
question of whether the people as a whole will be subject to a de
facto dictatorship of power, as well as an announced dictatorship of
"independent" power.  Some forms of oppression can be more pressing to
be sure like mass genocide, but even genocide is still in the same
general class of total disregard for the human dignity, rights, due
process and the consent of the governed.

Power, at first is tentative, operates in secret or with deniability,
seeks to cover itself.  ICANN's breathtaking power grab is, however,
totally out in the open "independence" -- when power is confident of
itself then it likes to flaunt its own power.  Independence is power -
it's self-determination.  ANd it's in all of our faces.  We don't
matter unless ICANN wants us to matter.  They'd say, if pressed
there's nothing we can do about it against ICANN's consent....

So correct me if I'm wrong on this IN THE MAIN, Roland, don't nibble
at the edges with little critiques that fail to address the meat of
what I'm saying.  Around three or four other posters have written that
they follow me, in so many words.  Because, if I'm right, and I don't
see any avenue, unfortunately, for me to be wrong (only reversal of
course, perhaps by court order), then the details of the democracy
proposal are truly inconsequential compared to the need to restore any
democracy at all.

I'll draft up a democracy-proposal to a suitable requester, but not to
someone who on the surface appears to care so little about it that he
goes to pains to avoid any outright condemnation at democracy's loss.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

PS Put yourself down in a detailed roll call vote response, so to
speak, and if you really take a position on this, then I'll take a
position and sketch out a specific vision for you.  Alternatively,
even without that, for a charitable donation of US $500 to the group
or charity of my choice I'll work up a white paper on this for you.
Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
upset with ICANN right now...
On 10/19/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
> <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9 at mail.gmail.com>, at
> 10:16:08 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>And indeed, Roland, you step right up to the plate and appear to taunt
>>me,
>
> "Challenge" would be a better word.
>
>>for the good cause of which entirely escapes me and I'll bet some
>>other people on the list, to come up with a detailed democratic
>>solution to a technical ICANN issue, clearly implying your belief that
>>democracy is unworkable, difficult or not worth it.
>
> I have specifically refrained from making any such judgement until I can
> examine your practical proposal on how to make a democratic decision,
> regarding a typical issue that ICANN might be deciding upon.
>
> Your proposal may be workable, it may not. Until we hear it, we can't
> tell.
>
>  >Roland Perry is NOT listening to me
>
> Oh, I am. But I just keep hearing the same thing over and over again.
>
>  >-- a humble former lawyer and writer about democracy, and he's not
>  >acting like he's concerned at all about democracy's nonexistence at
>  >ICANN, he's just focused on his perception that democracy's unworkable.
>
> I don't think I've expressed an opinion on the level of democracy
> currently operating inside ICANN. And I can't tell whether your version
> would work, because you keep failing to describe it.
>
>  >QUESTION:  Roland, why do you support me not having even the paltry
>  >equal status of being one out of over a 100 million voters with an
>  >attenuated say, but a say nonetheless via the USG DOC, over ICANN?
>
> Why do you think I don't support you? Until you give us an idea of how
> your new processes would work, it's impossible to know whether we'd
> support them.
> --
> 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