[governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...)

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Occasionally, just occasionally - like the .com contract - a layer of oversight over the icann board seems fairly appropriate.  Else, sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes, with a multiplicity of custodes each with their own agenda.  Sounds like fun?

--srs (iPad)

On 23-Jan-2013, at 17:16, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
> <suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
>> The problem being that nature abhors a vacuum.  There will be SOME power structure that will rise following this denationalization - and I am not at all sure we're going to like the alternative any more than we would like say the ITU taking things over.   Like Norbert I'd be interested in hearing what McTim has to suggest.
> 
> 
> I can't speak for Avri or Milton, but what I would prefer is zero
> nation states providing oversight over ICANN rather than one (or 195).
> 
> I think ICANN can stand alone without an overseer (besides it's own
> Board).   Of course, I don't think it likely to happen, but it is my
> preference.
> 

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