If you check the time stamps, you'll see that my declaration that I could no longer
support IDNO or its activities came AFTER I was expelled from membership by Joop
Teemstra. I did not resign. But since you've chosen to cross-post part of my essay
to these lists (golly, I wonder if Joop will slap your hand for violating the
no-cross-posting rules) I will republish the whole of my message here. And I just
realized (on checking my inbox for duplicates) that the substance of the e-mail that I
hesitated to republish is already public.
So here we have my essay on democracy, my indictment of IDNO as undemocratic, and Joop
Teemstra's declaration that taking me off the list of members at IDNO.org was no
mistake:
***************************************************************************************************************
When I was studying political science (bachelor's and halfway to master's degree
before switching to law) I learnt that different people have different perceptions of
what "democracy" means. That may be the problem at hand.
To me, "democracy" refers to an acceptance of certain "rules of the game." It is
first and foremost about procedural considerations, not about substance. There is no
a priori reason to believe that a Monarchy, democracy, and a plutocracy could not
adopt substantively identical policies on a number of crucial issues. The ways in
which they would go about taking those decisions, however, would be radically
different.
Democracy as such therefore begins and ends with the proposition that the voice of the
people is decisive and must be recognized as such. Democracy is intimately bound up
with freedom of expression. Freedom to criticize. Freedom to disagree. And it also
presupposes that members (yea, "founders") will not be cut off from the community
without the assent of the community. Democracy is confident that in an environment
where people can express themselves freely, the people will coalesce around workable
political decisions. Democracy also presupposes that the voters have access on some
level to the process of initiating decisions.
That's not how IDNO works. Only one person decides what will or will not be put to a
vote, and he determines the way in which issues will be put to a vote without
consulting the membership. Even as undemocratic an organization as the United States
House of Representatives allows the Members of Congress to make motions, including
motions in chief and amendments. Here there is not even a pretense that a member can
propose a matter for discussion and voting.
More importantly, members of IDNO are subject to expulsion at the whim of a single
individual. All it takes at IDNO is for criticism to leak out (in my case, I was
guilty of the sin of not reviewing the headers after hitting the reply button to a
cross-posted message. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea minima culpa.)) whereupon one finds
oneself . . . without notice, without an opportunity to be heard, without a vote being
conducted or the membership being consulted . . . booted from membership. Expelled by
fiat from on high.
IDNO is evidently engaged in a new and interesting use of the word "democracy" that I
have not before encountered.
And what, exactly, was the substance of the remark that got me so unceremoniously
booted from IDNO? It was the observation that you (I had to erase the "we" that I
typed the first time I wrote this sentence :-( are perceived as linked with Iperdome
and NSI.
It's not hard to see the connection or the rationale for it. The Executive Director
of the IDNO is Jay Fenello, the promoter of the Iperdome venture and a paid consultant
for NSI. NSI's agenda has always been opposed to ISOC, IAHC, and now ICANN, and IDNO
has had a decidedly anti-ISOC bent, as well as being opposed to the present
configuration of ICANN. Denying this element of IDNO's weltanschauung simply makes
it look like IDNO is an operating arm of Orwell's Ministry of Truth. When people ask
about an archive (that which is inimical to Minitruthfulness), the inquirer is
castigated as an obvious opponent. OF COURSE when NSI offered IDNO one of its seats
on the Names Council, it did so out of purely altruistic motives. (Yeah, right. BTW,
there's a bridge in downtown Manhattan that goes across the East River that has been
in my family for generations but my health is failing so I have to give it up it's
real lucrative and you can charge tolls and I'll sell it to you for just $500 okay?*)
By adding another voice to the noise surrounding the startup of ICANN, IDNO serves
NSI's agenda of postponing unto death the emergence of real competition.
I can no longer support this organization or its activities. While I have had my
differences with many of the members of IDNO, I believed it was in the best interest
of the Internet that individuals as such be empowered, and I saw IDNO as a means to
that end. I no longer see IDNO as anything more than a pawn of NSI, and I will not
continue to further NSI's agenda. I remain undecided as to whether trying to empower
individuals in internet governance is a quest for the Holy Grail or an attempt to make
a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
But let's make sure we all understand something: I am still a believer in democracy.
I'm not leaving this group voluntarily. I'm being expelled because the high poobah
will not tolerate dissent nor will he trouble himself to consult hoi polloi such as
the mere mortal membership of IDNO/CA before doing so.
Adios!
Kevin J. Connolly
*For da sake of youse who are unfamiliah wit' da Big Apple, dat's da Brooklyn Bridge
I'm offerin' ya :-)
>>> Joop Teernstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 06/15/99 10:06PM >>>
At 12:51 15/06/1999 -0400, Kevin Connolly wrote:
>And you guys have the nerve to suggest that you're a legitimate voice of
individual domain name holders? This is some kind of joke! The funny
thing is, I've been pushing away the players in the domain name war who
believe that I should organize an individuals' constituency as a
counterweight to IDNO. I believed (up until I found myself purged, about
half an hour ago) that while I had differences with some of the members
here, it was in the best interest of the Internet that we work together to
advance the empowerment of individuals with respect to the internet.
>
>And then you guys decided to go ahead and purge me :-)
>
I take responsibility for taking your name down from the website, Kevin.
I did so after your posting to dnso.org where you stated that in your view
our IDNO had almost no legitimacy left.
You also stated that we identified ourselves with Iperdome (?) and NSI.
Extremely damaging and unsupported statements.
(Indeed it looked like you were positioning yourself to organize a
constituency as a "counterweight to IDNO".)
I presumed that you were giving up your membership of our illegitimate
organization.
Are you?
If not, I will put your name back on forthwith, and with apologies for
misreading your intentions.
>Golly gosh gee willickers, but you've simplified my life :-)
>
Do I read that correctly then, that you no longer want to be a member.
Please clarify.
**********************************************************************
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential
and is or may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work
product doctrine, joint defense privileges, trade secret protections,
and/or other applicable protections from disclosure. If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this com-
munication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communi-
cation in error, please immediately notify us by calling our Help Desk
at 212-541-2000 ext.3314, or by e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**********************************************************************
