[bestbits] [governance] Your key ICANN issues as a user

[Lee W McKnight]

Hi,


2 quick comments:


I hate to say it but $500k on lobbying in DC amounts to a minimalist self-defense budget for an organization of ICANN's scale and scope. Especially for one with ICANN's global remit it could be - dangerous - for Rest of World if ICANN wasn't practicing - self-defense in DC.


Leaving that aside re digital divide issues, best fit imho within ICANN's remit is to focus on greater inclusion and participation, which I think is where John's comments were trying to steer folks.

Which to be blunt could amount to more travel $ for more folks on this list for participation in ICANN activities. Personally, that avenue to closing somewhat 'internet governance' participation strains/divides is basically more or less what ISOC, RIRs, ICANN, etc have been doing all along, so it bis reasonably straightforward to scale up.


On other hand, anything that can be construed as a general a tax on ICANN's - taxes - I mean fees - I mean non-profit revenues ; ) - for generic non-core ICANN issues well that gets complicated and controversial real fast. (Speaking as someone who proposed - taxing - ICANN's gTLD revenues and setting up an ICANN Foundation, way back when in an article with Milton, before the $$ really started to stream into ICANN coffers.)


And look how well that idea survived over the years up til gTLD launch - or not ; ).


Lee





________________________________
From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org <governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> on behalf of John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 5:33 AM
To: Daniel Pimienta
Cc: <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] Your key ICANN issues as a user

On Jun 19, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Daniel Pimienta <pimienta at funredes.org<mailto:pimienta at funredes.org>> wrote:
...
Maybe it is just that a global citizen,being netizen or not, can ask, with some genuine concern, why a body which is supposed to serve public interest in the area of Internet have to spent a little more that half a millon US$ in one year to 2 US based lobbying (*) consulting companies and if that money could not be used in a way more profitable to the general and global public interest.

That's a perfectly reasonable question relevant to ICANN's execution of its
mission...   However, Ian was proposing that some form of structural tax be
imposed for "addressing social issues associated with the Internet".   The latter
would be seen by many readers as a very different proposition than whether
ICANN's has committed sufficient funds to enable the participation of Internet
global citizens in ICANN's decision making processes; processes which are
focused on ICANN's existing mission of Internet identifier coordination.

The CS IGC should advocate for whatever position it feels appropriate; I pointed
out the distinction entirely to note that the perception of what you are seeking may
hinge on the explanation of why it is appropriate ICANN to commit funds in this
manner, and whether the issues to be addressed are those directly part of ICANN's
mission or simply Internet-related in some manner.

Best wishes of your efforts!
/John

Disclaimer: my views alone.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140620/dec880d1/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