Hi Lauren,
Thank you for your comments.
If you'd be so kind, we have a few more
questions for you.
At 11:56 AM 7/25/00, Lauren Weinstein wrote:
> > > PFIR Statement on Internet Policies, Regulations, and Control
> > ><snip>
> > > It is our belief that the current mechanism for making many key
> decisions in
> > > this regard, as embodied in The Internet Corporation for Assigned
> Names and
> > > Numbers, "ICANN" (http://www.icann.org), is proving to be inadequate
> to the
> > > task at hand. We believe that this is the result primarily of structural
> > > and historical factors, not the fault of the individuals directing
> ICANN's
> > > activities, whom we feel have been genuinely attempting to do the best
> > > possible job that they could with highly complex, contentious, and
> thankless
> > > tasks.
> >
> > Do you really believe that the current ICANN
> > board has managed their affairs in an ethical
> > and moral way (some measures of which include
> > truthfulness and honesty)?
> >
> > If so, then there are many who would like to
> > understand your beliefs, especially given the
> > historical record as *not* documented in the
> > GAO Report.
> >
> > If not, then by implication are we to assume
> > that you support compromises in ethics and
> > morals under some extreme circumstances,
> > such as those facing the ICANN board?
> >
> > These are not trick questions, only an attempt
> > to get to the common essence of the problems
> > surrounding ICANN.
>
>Greetings. Peter and I recognize that emotions run very high on these
>issues in many quarters. There are a wide range of opinions about any
>aspect of ICANN anyone cares to name. Everyone is of course free to draw
>their own conclusions about the actions of the board as a whole, and
>there's plenty of varied opinions on that as well.
>
>We feel that it would be most productive to not dwell on the emotional
>aspects of the situation but rather to concentrate on the basic questions:
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
-- George Santayana
While it is easy to discount the past due to the
emotions it evokes, it is not possible to solve the
current problems that are ICANN without understanding
how we got here.
Did you know that ICANN is at least the third attempt
to deal with these issues? Did you know that, in the
previous attempts, the process was hijacked just like
it has been with ICANN?
Did you know that ICANN is founded on the same model as the WTO?
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is99/governance/fenello.html#wto
Did you know that the same political process that brought
us ICANN, brought us the Telecom Act of 1996 (see McChesney)?
Did you know that this Act allowed corporations to *vastly*
increase and consolidate ownership over *all* media outlets
(see Cronkite)? Did you know that the WTO and ICANN have been
heavily supported by the corporate media (see FAIR and MRC)?
Without understanding this history, and the forces that
are driving these *very* bad decisions, how can we expect
the next iteration to turn out any different?
>1) Is ICANN making good decisions and doing a good job?
>
>2) If the answer to (1) is no, what's a proposed next step for consideration?
>
>We think we've made it pretty clear that we consider the answer to (1) to
>basically be no--we don't think ICANN is overall doing a good job, and in
>fact we feel that the situation is getting worse rather than better. We've
>also explained in some detail what we're suggesting for (2). That's where
>we feel we need to put our efforts to contribute the most towards solving
>these problems.
While many agree that ICANN is bad situation that is
getting worse, your proposed solution scares the pants
off of most of us who have been in the trenches.
Consider what *could* happen under your proposal. We
could end up with a legitimate governance body, duly
authorized by the governments of the world, captured
by the same forces that have captured ICANN.
>We'll let others, if they wish, dissect the ICANN board's motivations and
>the history in more detail if they consider that course to be productive
>from their standpoint.
Before you attempt to save us from ICANN, perhaps
you would consider engaging in a dialog with the
so-called rabble. (To subscribe to AWPD, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-)
We are not crazies, and we are not un-reasonable.
We are just angry about the continued arrogance
of our "elders" who keep screwing things up for
the rest of us.
Jay.
>--Lauren--
>Lauren Weinstein
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
>Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
>Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello,
New Media Strategies
------------------------------------
http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480
Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World
-------------------------------------------------------
"We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle
between corporate globalization and popular democracy."
http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml
-- David Korten
