Greg Skinner wrote:
>Now, on the other hand, it may not be very well known that consumers
>have choices, or that there might be reasons why they should exercise
Have you ever thought that maybe people online aren't "consumers"
but users and they don't want "choices" they want some say over
who is determining what they should have "choices" over?
It seems to me that the model of society being used here is
a fallacious model.
It is that people are "consumers" and not citizens or netizens.
That government and corporations are the bestowers of their
largess on the vulnerable "consumer."
This is contrary to the notion that citizens are the
sovereigns, and they oversee what government does, and
government oversees what companies do.
All this is what should be happening, but the ICANN model
has the world upside down and is trying to force that upside
down model on the rest of the world.
The Internet has developed because it did make netizenship
possible, because government included scientists who
recognized the need for real input into what was happening.
I recognize there are those who want to replace the Internet
with something more like tv and radio.
But that isn't the nature of the Internet and their efforts
won't succeed, but they will do harm to the Internet and
its development.
Ronda
