| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
The Caribbean moves to Europe
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 56 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 love The Register's stories, and especially those on ICANN. However this one is seriously astray.
It is true that ICANN rules allocate territories and colonies to the region of their "parents" rather than to the region they are physically located in. But this is not a new rule which was introduced ad hoc. It has been that way for over half a decade since July 2000. And it is an ICANN policy, not a ccNSO policy. The suggestion that the ccNSO has somehow made up this rule is incredibly offensive to those who are members.
I actually disagree with the policy, but it is unfair to suggest it was introduced just to allow the ccNSO to be formed. The labelling of it as a "brand new rule" is quite false.
I would also query the statement that "five-sixths" are refusing to join. Around half the ccTLDs just do not participate in global issues at all in any way. Have never posted on a list, attended a meeting. It is certainly true however that most of Europe have made a conscious decision not to join, and this does affect the credibility of the ccNSO.
The list of what changes are wanted, is somewhat misleading. If you ask current ccNSO members (I am with .nz which is a member) about that wishlist, and they would say we already have all these things. The debate has been largely a legalistic one about minor enhancements in the bylaws to remove perceived ambuigituy. There is no major policy difference between current members and non-members about what the powers of the ccNSO should be. Absolutely no-one at all has suggested ccNSO policies would bind non members for example. It is a red herring.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
| Starting Score: |
1 |
point |
| Moderation |
|
+1 |
|
| Extra 'Informative' Modifier |
|
0 |
|
| Karma-Bonus Modifier |
|
+1 |
|
| Total Score: |
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
Despite Mexico's signature on NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement), ICANN does not consider Mexico to be part of North America.
I was elected to ICANN's Board of Directors from North America - which ICANN defines as Canada, the United States, Greenland, Bermuda, St Pierre and Miquelon. Apparently in an unnoticed event of plate tectonics Mexico had detached from North America and moved elsewhere.
ICANN, as it does in so many areas, appears to be trying to overleap what was done by others - consider that this is the 60th anniversary of the Yalta Convention in which the world was divided into spheres of influence. Perhaps ICANN is merely trying to do ++Yalta.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| - 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
| | 2 replies beneath your current threshold. |
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
|
