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)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Heterarchies meet Hierarchy in the At Large | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 5 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.
    My reply from the GA list
    by vbertola on Monday February 24 2003, @11:28PM (#11236)
    User #3435 Info | http://bertola.eu.org/
    >First, let's not forget that ICANN has no future without an At Large to
    >which significant numbers of existing At Large Activists can be delivered.
    >Without that, it cannot support any claim to be fulfilling its core mission
    >and ultimately will collapse.

    ...and likely be replaced by the ITU, an intergovernmental
    organization that knowingly gives the public voting powers and broad
    ways to participate. Would that be an achievement for us?

    So I agree with most of your views, but not with the strategy you seem
    to devise to get them realized.

    And by the way:

    >Instead of fostering real public participation by throwing the door open to
    >all groups and individuals, which is the way the At large was originally
    >intended to be, instead, the ALAC is proposing to draw key players from a
    >community already dominated by hand picked representatives.

    Please document this statement. What did the ALAC propose and where?

    >Yet, if I understand this correctly, ICANN will not
    >be overseeing the internal procedures of any of these external organizations
    >directly. That means no oversight for ensuring proper democratic procedures
    >take place within the RALOs, and no enforcement.

    So, if ICANN manages the At Large directly, it is trying to take
    control of it, and if it does not, it is not controlling it enough.
    What are you proposing then?

    >In the current vision, ICANN neatly removes itself from any direct
    >responsibility for an At Large voting process of any kind.

    Yes.

    But this has the great advantage that ICANN (whose current Board is
    openly against online elections) also removes itself from having any
    word about how that voting process may happen. And it was the only way
    we could let the current Board accept *any* At Large voting process or
    direct representation.

    But this also means that now you have to actually get your hands dirty
    and do something more than writing articles, as many of us have been
    doing on their time and at their expense for months now.

    >While the At Large is still generally perceived as crucial, banishing it
    >altogether is not an option for ICANN. Consequently, the At Large does not
    >have to agree to such a one-sided agreement and even now, users have the
    >choice to stand their ground and insist on ICANN support for a more
    >meaningful At Large Structure.

    Oh well, insist. Stand up, stop breathing and start crying until your
    mom will come and protect you from the baddies. But I fear that the
    last years prove that there's no "mom" that will come to save you.
    Certainly not the US DoC. Certainly not the ITU or the UN. It's year
    2003, the world is ruled by governments and corporations, and you have
    to use your elbows, your smile, your creativity and your tenacity to
    get some space for the common citizens.
    --vb. (Vittorio Bertola)
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Starting Score:    2  points
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   2  
    Re:My reply from the GA list
    by jo-uk@rcn.com on Tuesday February 25 2003, @10:32AM (#11243)
    User #1374 Info
    Vittorio,
    Public voting powers and broad ways to participate would be a vast improvement on what we have now, a cartel that is taking users to the cleaners. However, my point is not about replacing ICANN, it's about poor leveraging in current negotiations. ICANN can do more than is being offered, but it needs to be pressed home.

    Meanwhile, the ALAC door is wide open for allegations of nepotism, which is the price ICANN pays for appointing representatives, rather than electing them, and for back room dealing, rather than open and transparent processes. It is not for me to prove, it is for the ALAC to disprove.

    You wrote:-
    So, if ICANN manages the At Large directly, it is trying to take control of it, and if it does not, it is not controlling it enough.
    What are you proposing then?

    Answer: No, that is not what I said, it is your opinion, not mine.

    The At Large's best interests are best served by repeating worldwide elections, to establish RALOs if that's the way ICANN wants it to work. In return, it seems a reasonable request to eneter into an MoU with ICANN, whereby the RALO's would give up their autonomy. However, if no meaningful help is forthcoming from ICANN, then why would the At Large want to give up it's autonomy? This is not a trivial issue, it's a deal breaker and while unresolved, the natural evolution for the At Large is, and will continue to be as a group of heterarchies, without any central leader, and operating outside of ICANN. That's not a bad situation to be in. Losing autonomy and getting nothing in return is worse.

    You tell me what each At Large group will get from an MoU that a) is worth giving up autonomy and b) it can't live without?

    Regards,
    Joanna
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    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