| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
ICANN - WSIS Worlds Continue to Converge
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 17 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Marilyn "AT&T" Cade is from AT&T
Why do you continue to perpetuate the word games ?
Do you take ANY responsibility for perpetuating the ICANN and ISOC shams ?
The casual reader has no clue who Marilyn Cade is.
One of the major **problems** with the liberal
academic players has always been the myth that
people are individuals and only operate as
individuals. That is not the case. Marilyn Cade
is a highly-paid Washington D.C. lobbyist from
AT&T. She is clueless and she could not care
less about "the Internet Community". She is a
meat-space person and a traditional long-distance
telco voice-to-voice person. More importantly,
she is a big-money-trumps-the-little-guy person.
She has been one of the main manipulators of
the ICANN-regime from the start, along with
similar cronies from IBM.
As an academic, if you entered a school yard
of third graders and you noticed that one of
the kids was 6 feet tall and weighed 200 lbs.
and was kicking the other kids in the teeth
would you not take notice ? Would you look out
at that school yard and say, "Oh, la-de-da
all of the kids are equal and they play so
well with each other", "pay no attention to
that one kid that just elbowed another and
sent them flying into the pavement". Life as
an academic is so pure and so wonderful.
Let's all put our rose-colored glasses on
and ignore the realities of the world.
Do you take ANY responsibility for perpetuating the ICANN and ISOC shams ?
Did you notice ?
Marilyn "AT&T" Cade is from AT&T
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
Who IS Accountable for the ICANN Fiasco ?
Check out the article by, none other than,
ESTHER DYSON over at http://www.circleid.com/
Esther Dyson IS (not was) responsible for much
of the ICANN fiasco and she now has the nerve
to act like she was not involved and is calling
for "accountability".
Where do people like her come from ?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
>>PAUL VERHOEF: Yes, I'll be glad to do that. As you know, we are throughout the organization recruiting at the moment now that the budget has been approved. I think of relevance for the council is that John Jeffrey is going to have additional staff, so that should help in providing you with continued general counsel office advice. Kurt is recruiting and that should help with continuous verification that of the operational implications of your discussions are taken into account. And I'm going to have two people relevant to the GNSO. One is going to be somebody who will coordinate in a senior position and a GNSO staff member directly. On those two positions, the senior position, we have interviewed our final candidates, and we will be coming to a decision shortly.
On the GNSO staff position, we're about to finalize the short list, and as soon as I get back to Brussels, we'll hope to do the last interview.
So I hope that we can conclude with the preferred candidate say late December, early February, and then depending on his/her availability, have the person start shortly after.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
ICANN Suckers Africa into IPv6, yet, ICANN does
not even use IPv6. What are the end-to-end IPv6
sub-nets for ALL of the ICANN Board, Staff,
and the ISOC players ? How do those IPv6 systems
talk to IPv4 systems ? [Clue: they do not]
http://forum.icann.org/mail-archive/alac/msg00807. html
Roll-out of IPV6 and Set-up of IXPs in Africa
Speaker: Sunday Folayan, AfriNIC Board member
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
ICANN Concludes .COM Has Competition
>>MARILYN CADE: I have a follow-up comment. But we all have to acknowledge and that in the space of a registry, there really aren't -- there's really not competition at the registry level, and we all understand that. So when we say what's wrong with letting the market decide that, in fact, the registrar doesn't have competition in that space. And I'm not trying to be burdensome about that. I'm just saying why wouldn't we ask that question in the process.
>>CHUCK GOMES: First of all, I totally disagree with you that there's no competition in that space. I see Ken raising his hand wanting to talk. They offer different services for dot info, added value services, than we offer for dot com.
The ccTLD registries offer different things for their community than we do.
There is competition, and that's, of course, the reason we introduce competition.
>>MARILYN CADE: I'm sorry; but I asked a question at the end of my statement.
>>CHUCK GOMES: Your question was?
>>MARILYN CADE:What's wrong with just taking the quick look?
>>CHUCK GOMES: I'm trying to figure out what it is accomplishing. What is -- A quick look -- by the way, the quick look, I think you're being more specific than just the quick-look process.
The part of the quick-look process that I was trying to get clarification on just had to do with this question of does it have an impact on registrars or registrants. Of course it will. So I'm not sure what you have to look at there.
If it's not a forced service; okay? If there's still choice there by the registrar and the registrant, then what's being accomplished? It's not clear to me.
>>BRUCE TONKIN: Go ahead, Ken.
>>KEN STUBBS: Well, naturally, I want to echo Chuck's comments with regard to competition. The last time I looked, there's about 260, 270-plus competitors out there for global TLDs.
===
Can anyone imagine Ken Stubbs attempting to
compete in a true free-market situation ?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
The .US Department of .COMmerce - 75 Cent Names
The .US Department of .COMmerce will be running
the "new" .COM Registry with names priced at
75 cents, per name, per year. The new head of
the .US Department of .COMmerce is from CUBA.
He has the background to understand the socialist
regime of the ISOC-ICANN era, which is over.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
In the early 16th century, a devout monk from Germany visited Rome. He was awed to be at the very seat of Christendom. Then he looked around and was appalled at what he saw. He, and then Germany, and then much of Europe, awoke to the abuses of an institution that was claiming a monopoly on the right to mediate the relationship between man and God. The Roman Catholic Church of the time was selling indulgences (purporting to reduce your time in purgatory, for a fee), then spending the money on grand parties. Luther realized that there was nothing in the sacred texts themselves that gave any intermediate institution the exclusive power or right to stand between individuals and salvation.
It’s time for netizens to come to a similar realization about their direct relationship with the empowerment offered by the internet. None of the core principles that produced the net give any set of clerics – even the original engineers, or ISOC, much less ICANN – the right to prevent innovation at the edge. Indeed, the sacred texts of the net explicitly empower decentralized action. The internet arose because everything not prohibited was permitted. Now, ICANN is itself holding new TLDs, and even new services from existing registries and registrars, in purgatory – occasionally deigning to accept high fees to let some proposals proceed. (Registries and registrars both provide services at the edge, running their own databases on their own servers.) Instead of acting appropriately to define (and ban) sin, the clerics of the internet are seeking to set themselves up as intermediaries who must be pleased and paid before anyone can do anything new.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
http://www.icann.org/tlds/dotnet-reassignment/net- rfp-final-10dec04.pdf
"Policy development: Any future .NET registry
agreement must specify that policy development
for .NET will take place in an open bottom-up
process, which enables input from the full
Internet community via ICANN's processes."
====
Does "the full Internet community" include IPv6 users ?
Does ICANN have any IPv6 access, servers, experience ?
|
|
|
|
[ 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
|
