[governance] Re: [Arab IGF] ICANN to get $8 Million More from New .com Deal

[Fahd A. Batayneh]

Milton,

On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>
>    1. How did the board approve .xxx while the community was against it.**
>    **
>
> *[Milton L Mueller] That’s easy. First, there was no unified view on
> .xxx. The term “the community” should never be used, certainly not with a
> definite article, because there is never unanimity in a global
> constituency. It is like asking whether “the community” is Christian,
> Muslim, or Buddhist or Atheist. The answer is Yes. And if you want to avoid
> the kind of religious warfare and repression that devastated Europe for two
> centuries and which still haunts the middle east, you will avoid the whole
> notion that there is a homogeneous community that can impose its will on
> all of us.*
>
> *That leads to the second point. New TLDs are a form of expression and no
> community, no matter how large the majority, has the right to censor them
> unless their use violates some other human right or breaks some law. If you
> don’t like the kinds of things that might be registered under .xxx, don’t
> go to the websites. Simple as that.*
>

I am neither against .xxx, nor against New gTLDs :-) However, the debate
surrounding them were not treated in the best interest of the "majority"
(since you would prefer not using the term "The Community"). The process
must have been more open and transparent (5 years of working on the New
gTLD program and designing it does not mean that it was open and
transparent).

Mind you, do not focus much on some of the terms I use (such as "The
Community") as when you were deeply involved with discussions related to
ICANN and IG, I was still an undergraduate student trying to get a good
education :-)

>
>    1. How did the board approve the New gTLD program while many answers
>    and concerns were unanswered. ****
>
> *[Milton L Mueller] This is an unrealistic perspective. There will always
> be uncertainty and opposition when anything important is involved. If
> governments or businesses were not allowed to make a move unless all
> uncertainties were removed and no one had any “concerns,” then no one would
> be able to do anything.*
>

Agree. I was just trying to make a point there.

Fahd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120811/5e491264/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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