ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    Membership Issues ICANN decision on ALSC report delayed
    posted by jon on Sunday November 04 2001, @09:16AM

    mpawlo writes "As reported by ICANNwatch I have had a debate on ICANN issues with Mr Carl Bildt. Bildt stated in his reply that the ICANN decision on the At Large Study Committee report (due to be presented on Monday, November 5, 2001) will be delayed due to the change of scope on the ICANN Los Angeles meeting this November. Instead, a final decision can be made no earlier than at the Ghana meeting, May 5-13, 2002."



    This was also confirmed in a submission by Esther Dyson on the ALSC Forum mailing list.

     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

     
      Related Links  
  • As reported by ICANNwatch
  •  
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    ICANN decision on ALSC report delayed | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 13 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: ICANN decision on ALSC report delayed
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Monday November 05 2001, @08:09AM (#3417)
    User #2810 Info
    So did this go on or not? If so, what was the spin? -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: ICANN decision on ALSC report delayed
    by Mpawlo on Monday November 05 2001, @12:31PM (#3419)
    User #2936 Info | http://www.pawlo.com/

    No report is officially online as of yet, but here is the main parts anyway:
    http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,48150,00.html

    "On Monday, a committee of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), said it wants to adopt a proposal allowing directors to be elected by members of the public who own Internet domains."

    Newsbytes take on the report:
    http://newsbytes.com/news/01/171866.html

    "It's a mistake to push these issues entirely down
    to Ghana," Bildt said, referring to ICANN's next
    scheduled meeting, which is set to take place in
    Ghana, Africa next March.

    This is supposed to be the final report:
    http://www.lextext.com/FinalreportNov5.html

    Eventually the report will be published under:
    http://www.atlargestudy.org/
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: ICANN decision on ALSC report delayed
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Wednesday November 07 2001, @03:48AM (#3449)
    User #2810 Info
    AP coverage via siliconvalley.com. Karl Auerbach threatens resignation if the report is adopted:
    It's just utterly laughable...I would seriously question my desire to remain associated with a group that just slapped the Internet community in the face.
    I'm with Karl. By taking part in the process one imparts legitimacy to it, a legitimacy that is entirely undeserved.

    How can the final report say (10th paragraph) with a straight face that the reduction in seats from 9 to 6 has wide, though not unanimous, support, the opposite is true. Please prove me false by showing any evidence of that wide support. In the same paragraph they state that this [9 at large member] proposal is very unlikely to get sufficient support within the wider ICANN community. Apart from the fact that such an amount wasn't a proposal, it was a promise, it certainly received wider support than that the seats be reduced to 6. Of course some existing players might not support it, why voluntarily give up some power, though no doubt the registrars will support requiring that internet users buy a domain name before they can vote. This is a betrayal. This is also the ICANN spin machine at work, using its favorite tool: The Big Lie. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 6 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com