| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Dear DoC & Congress: It's 2004. Do You Know Where Your ICANN Is?
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 3 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
I'm missing part of the logic of your argument. Your argument starts from ICANN's movement toward setting up office in Brussels and concludes with a warning to Europeans that a Brussels office will decrease ICANN's accountability to Europeans. That surprising leap from premise to conclusion seems to flow from a viewpoint that by listening to more interests ICANN will become less accountable.
To the contrary, to become properly accountable to the entire global community--as the White Paper promised over five years ago--ICANN needs to establish the mechanisms to fully involve interested parties throughout the world. Offices in Europe (and I hope in Latin America, Asia-Pacific, and Africa) are an important step toward realizing the promise. I assume that's why the US Government strongly supported ICANN's establishment of offices in other regions in connection with the recent WSIS summit.
Also, it is wrong to assert that Europeans "want the US out of this"; what Europeans (and others) want is to be full participants with ICANN, sharing with the US responsibility for setting policies for those things ICANN coordinates.
*George
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
I don't think it's a matter of power, but rather a practical step forward towards the necessary evolution of ICANN.
ICANN has to become a truly global organization, and this includes making its footprint actually global, in terms of geographical presence, internal staff diversity, support for a reasonable number of major world languages other than English, etc. It also includes establishing closer interactions with people, groups and institutions that are not based in California or in Washington D.C..
Having regional offices, as well as other regional structures (including the regional At Large organizations!) will make it much easier to accomplish these objectives, and will help in making ICANN more open and more accountable.
--vb. (Vittorio Bertola)
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
A touch of the black helicopters here I think. I think the Brussels office has been set up specifically to give Mr. Paul Verhoef a place from which to work. Whether or not that is a commecially sensible decision is something on which I would reserve judgment. However, suggesting this is all a fiendish plan to off-shore ICANN and escape the clutches of USG is a bit far-fetched. If it is, this move would be out of the frying-pan into the fire. Rather better be in the clutches of the USG than Brussels and the EC - hardly known for their underregulation, and who are one of the few organizations that could give ICANN lessons on being dilatory (take the .eu launch slippage) and introducing organizational opacity; mmm... may be they'll be best buddies.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
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
|
