Karl and all,
Well said Karl, and to a great degree I agree. I would add that however,
as we ARE really talking about governance, we collectively must
decide as stakeholders determing what FORM of government we must have.
This is something that the ICANN Interim Board seems to believe that it
should decide for us as stakeholders. I completely disagree with that
sort of concept. But it is plainly evident that the members of the
ICANN Interim Board and the GIP group (www.gip.org) plainly are following.
Therefore it is my belief that for this reason we are having so much
disagreement and heated debate, rather than collectively working
to come up with policies or policy proposals that the stakeholders
can than determine collectively by vote they feel are good, right,
just and fair. As Lincoln said, "A divided house cannot stand".
He was right. So it is with where we are now.
Karl Auerbach wrote:
> > They do not have any experience in the Internet's style of decision making
> > and they do not suffer from the delays they are causing.
>
> The "Internet's style of decision making", assuming that means the warm
> image of love, peace, and good vibes as exemplified by the IETF ...
>
> That style is no more reality than Disneyland's "Main Street" reflects
> real life in late 19th century America.
>
> Just as the 19th century America was a place of near revolution by
> industrial workers, disease, poverty, and political machines, that vague
> thing called "Internet style" is also full of things that we like to pass
> over or to forget.
>
> The IETF has had many major debates, red faces, sweat pouring out, people
> shouting, people screeming. I know, I was there doing some of the
> shouting.
>
> In other words it was the normal sort of stuff that happens when people
> disagree.
>
> The "Internet style" is really nothing more than a fanciful recollection
> of the best parts of a fortuitious happenstance that happened among a
> number of relatively same-minded people, all of whom were fairly affluent
> and with similar cultural backgrounds, to discuss somewhat objective,
> technical material.
>
> But we're now in the world of "Internet governance".
>
> Yes, there are those who adhere to the euphemism that we are just doing
> "technical coordination", but they are just engaging in self-deception.
>
> ICANN *is* Internet Governance.
>
> It is not "technical coordination" to adopt policies regarding the
> interaction of trademarks and domain names. It is governance, pure and
> simple.
>
> And governance brings debate.
>
> And this debate is not among a small group of like-minded techies about
> whether some protocol formulation is better than another as measured by
> some objective criteria.
>
> I reject the notion that the "Internet style" is something that is either
> appropriate or useful in these discussions.
>
> As for the delay that these discussions are causing -- well, yes, I am
> still paying $35/year to NSI for my domain registrations. But other than
> that, I don't see much harm in discussion.
>
> I see much more harm arising from an abrupt, almost panic-driven adoption
> of highly biased regulatory structures such as being proposed by WIPO.
>
> --karl--
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
