Michael Froomkin wrote: > I think your questions fall under what they mean by "procedure" i.e. "not > substance". Their view seems to be that procedural regularity is not a > priority at this stage. I don't really understand why that's the view, > and I don't share it, but it does seem to have persuaded some serious > people (cf. Randy Bush's comments to me in the dnso discuss list). > Of course, from a strict "matter of principle" POV, you are absolutely right (as most lawyers do ;>)). The practical terms are, though, that while we discuss about principles and procedures, Rome burns. This whole fandango started from the continuous attempt to provide the perfect answer to the wrong question. The initial need was the expansion of the Domain Name Space and the transition to a competitive environment for the domain name registration business. Then new items were added to the agenda, the need to fix something that was working (IANA) was put forward, the US Government first participated to an effort (IAHC) then changed mind (Why? Of course, this has nothing to do with lobbying?), and the initial question remains still unanswered. In the meantime, we are trying to give a solution to something that was not a problem a couple of years ago, i.e. to define a perfect body that will handle in a perfect way all Internet Governance issues. And, of course, until this body is not perfect, no decision will be taken on anything else. I confess that, when I was a school student, I liked this approach. I was very perfectionist, and when I had some schoolwork to do, I was often restarting from scratch, throwing away all what I did before and looking for the perfect solution. Then, after having given back to the teacher several times blank sheets at the end of the allowed time (and having earned bad notes), I changed my attitude, and preferred to give partial answers in due time that no answer at all. So I got my degree. Don't misunderstand me: I will do my best to make ICANN act in the best possible way, but I cannot accept the solution of stopping everything and stay put until everything will be perfect. Such solution does not help the forces that are looking forward to a progress of the Internet, but rather those who want the situation tot to change of a bit. > In the law business, it long ago became conventional wisdom that > 'procedure IS substance'. That is especially true in the formative stages > of institutions. In my most optimistic moments I surmise that people from > other disciplines are more short-term and bottom-line oriented, and this > difference in professional socialization may account for some of the > apparent disconnect. > Exactly. > One tries to stay optimistic. > Me too. Regards Roberto
