[governance] "Oversight"

[Lee W McKnight]

McTim,

It may well be true as you note that:

>Even in the poker scenario, the USG can produce 5 aces to anyone
>else's 4 aces.
>This is unfortunate, but it is what it is.

To now take Parminder's view on this, we are not in the game, if we are not at the table, or cannot even recognize what the table looks like.  Soo...from a global IG view, we now know who holds which cards. Which is progress of a sort. 

And personally, I am very happy that root zone operators, under no contractual or other legal obligation to anyone, have trump cards.

As to what other cards or games to play going forward, that indeed - is the question.

Lee
________________________________________
From: McTim [dogwallah at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 3:20 PM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight
Cc: parminder
Subject: Re: [governance] "Oversight"

On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu> wrote:
> Parminder,
>
> If I may attempt to mediate yet again, I think we are indeed making some
> progress on this thread.
>
> On the one hand, there is the 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' description
> of what is working now from David and McTim

I can't speak for David, but my position is MUCH more nuanced than that.

What I have been saying for a very long time indeed is that tilting at this
particular windmill is not a productive use of time.

The USG is NOT going to let this go, no matter what, so let's work on
things we CAN change.


..and noting the key safety
> feature in the global inter-net, that neither the USG, nor ICANN, nor anyone
> really, is in a position to tell -most- of the root zone operators what to
> do.


right

>
> They are already working for you, and for - global civil society. Always
> have, and hopefully always will.

right

>
> Hence David's bemusement at the techie's being accused of things when they
> have been defending all of us - from any arbitray government action, or
> private action, emanating from anywhere.  No time to go into Jon Postel's
> power play/innocent test exercise demonstrating this point to USG back in
> the day, but anyway.
>
> Next, the question you raise - well if the US NTIA plays a part in the
> system, why can't we swap out US NTIA for XYZ UN or other MSH/and/or UN
> process.
>
> And now we get to the poker analogy or unilateral disarmament scenario,
> however one wishes to characterize it:
>
> WHEN there is a plausible UN or global scenario/mechanism on the table to
> talk through how exactly an alternative would work, such that USG/DOC/NTIA
> can get out of the engine room, THEN - there is something to talk about.

Even in the poker scenario, the USG can produce 5 aces to anyone
else's 4 aces.
This is unfortunate, but it is what it is.

--
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

-------------- 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