Hi Ellen,
I too applaud your efforts, several
years strong.
In actuality, none of us have a
monopoly on truth, and it is only
through an open exploration of these
issues, that a collective truth may
emerge.
Please continue to fight your battles,
just as I will continue to fight mine :-)
Jay.
At 05:42 PM 8/4/99 , Ellen Rony wrote:
>>At 10:28 PM 7/28/99 , Ellen Rony wrote:
>>>FWIW, I don't concur with Jay's theories about a biased press. We have
>>>not bias but confusion. This evolution of the DNS is complicated,
>>>convoluted, and contentious, so it isn't easy to report on the activities
>>>of ICANN and the Department of Commerce in terms that the general
>>>readership can understand.
>>
>
>Jay Fenello wrote:
>
>>Frankly, I don't why this story has not been covered.
>>All that I know for certain is that 1) it *hasn't* been
>>covered, and 2) "confusion" is an explanation that simply
>>doesn't work for me (especially when I have personally
>>described, in no uncertain terms, my perspectives to
>>many of the reporters writing these biased pieces).
>
>I applaud your efforts, several years strong, to educate the journalists
>and interested parties.
>
>My theory about the coverage of the USG/ICANN story is: this shift of
>Internet administration to the private sector has so many twists and turns
>that it isn't easily given to soundbytes. Mention ICANN and a reporter
>must then also describe the whole transfer of functions from NSF to NTIA,
>from IANA to ICANN. Most readers' eyes will glaze over before you can say
>IFWP.
>
>Contributing to the confusion is the "divide and conquer" factor. It's hard
>to get a profile of the situation because so many issues are being debated
>simultaneously in a rush to the endgame. Into the middle of what we are
>told is a bottom-up consensus based decision making process, we have DOJ
>investigating NSI, Congress investigating ICANN, and the EU entering the
>melee. This is headspinning activity, even for the most devout followers
>of the process.
>
>It reminds me of the towns that, seeing opportunity for raising their
>property tax revenue base, develop their hillsides in a mad sweep of
>construction while the old timers lament the destruction of views and
>clogging of traffic arteries. Years later, when the building subsides and
>the policymakers take a breath, they may regret their haste but by then
>there's a new paridigm in place and a new generation of residents who don't
>remember what the town looked like when its now densely populated hillsides
>were open space.
>
>I lament that it took eight months of dischord and, finally, involvement of
>the DOC to get ICANN to hold open meetings; that this is supposed to be a
>bottom-up consensus-based structure but that there is no representation in
>current decisionmaking of the non-commercial Internet users (a substantial
>body); that working groups are proceeding to final recommendations
>although they are not constituted in accord with the ICANN bylaws; that
>recommendations will be forwarded to an unelected, unaccountable,
>incomplete and interim body.
>
>So, Jay, we pick our battles. But claiming a biased press on these
>complicated issues simmply isn't one of those I wish to pursue.
>
>
>
>
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Ellen Rony Co-author
>The Domain Name Handbook ____ http://www.domainhandbook.com
>========================== ^..^ )6 =============================
>ISBN 0879305150 (oo) -^-- +1 (415) 435-5010
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] W W Tiburon, CA
> DOT COM is the Pig Latin of the Information Age
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc. 404-943-0524
-----------------------------------------------
What's your .per(sm)? http://www.iperdome.com
