At 11:31 AM -0400 7/31/00, vinton g. cerf wrote: >The trouble is, it is too little, too late - we're already over the >top in terms of what we can handle in a reasonable time frame, taking >our funding (now expended) into account. More time is more cost and more >delay - it doesn't add up. I'm sorry, but I just don't understand this, Vint. The White Paper specified a democratic process. ORSC put in a competing bid to ICANN to become Newco which included the type of voting registration and procedures that fulfilled the White Paper's mandate. ICANN was chosen as at least the partial contract winner. Now, two years later, we still do not have any type of democratic process in place, and now, two years later, funding is mentioned as an issue? Given the amount of money spent on Jones Day, a PR firm, and the ICANN salaries, it is difficult for me to accept that funding is an issue. Given the two years of waiting, I can't accept that the time frame is an issue. Especially given the ramming through of the UDRP, extensions for certain board member terms, etc. as "we must do this right now." It confuses me that something as important as representation has been studied and sidelined for so long and even now is broken enough to deny people the ability to register (myself included, I tried for quite some time) while the UDRP and other measures have sailed right through in the face of harsh criticism. I realize that you, personally, were not on the board when some of these decisions were made. However, I believe that if "The Internet is for Everyone" that everyone who desires it will be given representation in decisions that could well restrict everyone's uses of the medium.
