[governance] Towards Singapore

[McTim]

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 6:13 PM, David Allen
<David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu> wrote:
> Thanks to Wolfgang Kleinwächter for this delightful piece, more than that -
> artful, graceful, a key history for next thinking and a pleasure indeed!

Tis indeed.

<analysis snipped>

> 2a  This and other such descriptions, IMHO, lack actionable substance -
> there is no 'there' there.  While most admirable in aspiration, the
> pronouncements so far on multi-stakeholderism do not get beyond aspiration.

They are certainly descriptive (not just aspirational) of what I
experience in my little corner of IG.

It seems to be time for my semi annual RIR attendee number crunching.

See http://meeting.afrinic.net/afrinic-14/index.php/register/participant-list
for raw data.
This time, due to the large number of university reps, I have broken
it down into 5 SH groups:

itc	30             14%
gov	24            12%
cs	25           12%
biz	60           29%
Acad	70  34%



<snip>

> What are the facts, as we consider if ICANN may be the paradigm for such
> Internet governance?

See above for facts about one aspect of ICANN processes that are truly
MS, despite a lack of "operable particulars".



> Despite all pretensions to the contrary, ICANN has served narrow interests,
> particularly the financial interests of that small handful who provide much
> of its funding.  The topic is usually taboo.  But more than one of those at
> the very core of the ICANN ecology plainly acknowledge this reality.  The
> organization finds ways to change policy, toward final stages, in ways that
> favor the tiny handful of incumbents, generally from the West, who provide
> its funding.
> This self-dealing is the very antithesis of 'public service' - this is self
> service, which only disadvantages the rest of the world.  To see the dynamic
> in some relief, we only have to look to recent uprisings in the Middle East.
>  ICANN is corrupt.
> In the end, such an ICANN miserably fails any test for trust or even-handed
> public service.

in its numbering bits, I think ICANN passes the test with flying
colors, naming bits, less so.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t