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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    .xxx Redux | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 14 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.
    “internet community” as such doesnt exist"
    by Anonymous on Wednesday April 19 2006, @03:52PM (#16700)
    Even reasoned views may not take, if the tone is either mildly sarcastic or stridently critical :)

    Yes ICANN should definitely hear from the Internet community at large. But if the Internet community at large starts developing consensus on anything at all?

    Why, the people with that consensus are quite likely to form another association or organization, yet another on the long list of organizations that participate in the Icann process.

    The “internet community” as such doesnt exist any longer I’m afraid - its too large and amorphous to have any recognizable characteristics of a community any longer, there’s way too much diversity (and that is, of course a good thing in a whole lot of ways, but bad if what this means is that you want to get broad based consensus for anything at all)

    On the other hand what you do have is lots of articulate individuals with personal opinions - which are quite likely as good as, or possibly better than, any other opinions being aired in ICANN.

    But well, knocking the ICANN process all the time (when people are not taking time off to knock the WSIS process) tends to drown any reasoned facts or opinions in the discussion.

    I’ve seen some part of WSIS (at least the thematic meetings on spam and security, before Tunis), and I’ve seen something I’ve observed in the ICANN process, on a larger scale ..

    WSIS has its clued and dedicated people just as it has its share of apparatchiks who have a solely political agenda. And of course ICANN is immune to “used car salesman” variety people and vested interests, right?

    Participating in the process to improve it always works far better than sitting on the sidelines (or in the hallways) with carping criticism and mordant blog posts. And very very few critics of either ICANN or WSIS do more than just criticize it. Which is sad.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    What is ICANN's End-Game ? Now They Are Exposed
    by Anonymous on Wednesday April 19 2006, @04:02PM (#16701)
    What is ICANN's End-Game ? Now They Are Exposed

    Now that ICANN has made complete fools of themselves
    and shown the "Internet Community" how NOT to
    handle a simple task, what is the ICANN End-Game ?

    Does ICANN become even more secretive and
    tight-fisted (like Postel) and claim even greater
    artificial scarcity when anyone with 1/2 a clue
    knows there is no reason for the scarcity?

    Does ICANN instead become an IOC-like body by
    now raking in cash from any suckers willing to
    throw money their way for the ICANN games
    "rights", which anyone with 1/2 a clue knows are
    all self-created?

    Does ICANN decide to rise even higher in the
    game of .PHD (piled higher and deeper) and
    decide to out-source even more of the real
    decisions to insiders that have clawed their
    way up Cerf's multi-level-marketing pyramid?
    [Will ICANN turn to a NEW.NET to handle new
    waves of market-trials greasing .XXX to Joffe
    and friends ?]
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    "the big issues are not on the table"
    by Anonymous on Wednesday April 19 2006, @04:29PM (#16702)
    I’ve finally recovered from another ICANN meeting, frustrated as ever. 700 or so people flew halfway around the world to hear canned presentations, dueling-monologue public form sessions, and resolutions that left major issues unresolved, and to gripe in the hallways about how little was being done.

    Every time I talked to someone who had been away from the ICANN scene for some time and returned, I heard the same assessment: “It looks just the same as it did N years ago,” for varying values of N. Yet many of us return nonetheless, I because I’m still trying to make ICANN responsive to the public interest.

    I’ve been trying to explain why ICANN inspires such vigorous debate and loathing. ICANN is not about big issues. A domain name policy, even a perfect one, isn’t going to cure cancer, or even bring connectivity to rural Africa. It’s no surprise many in the GAC (Government Advisory Committee) complain about the difficulty raising understanding of ICANN issues with constituents who don’t yet have reliable Internet access.

    But the big issues are not on the table. Even the big issues of Internet connectivity—bridging digital divides, routing around private or government-imposed obstacles, network neutrality—are not part of ICANN’s mandate or sphere of control. Thankfully. ICANN oversees allocation of IP address blocks, accredits domain name registrars, and decides what new top-level domains will enter the root zone.

    Furthermore, most of the functions ICANN oversees “just work.” Even if it doesn’t seem “fair” that MIT has more IP addresses than many countries, by and large, those who need addresses get them. Domain names resolve uniquely. Independently designed protocols interoperate.

    We’re fighting over table scraps from a table that wasn’t very well stocked to begin with. The fight for those crusts and bones gets even more vicious when the loaves and steaks aren’t part of the debate, because we can’t trade off more important issues in the bargaining.

    The problem is that when it doesn’t “just work,” ICANN’s “bottom-up” process is neither bottom-up nor effective to resolve the problems. Without big issues at stake, much of the general public can’t be bothered to learn all of ICANN’s acronyms and procedures to participate. Those who do are derided as kooks or edge cases. We’re told that the telephone company doesn’t want to hear from its customers (paraphrasing a comment by Board member Veni Markovski).

    ICANN’s problem is that the table scraps of issues are still important. Certainly to those who have built businesses in ICANN-regulated industries, most notably domain name registrars and registries. But also to the general public. Lots of issues fall between out-in-the-street-protest important and negligible: the cost of domain names, the availability of domain names and new pools of domain names (TLDs), the ability of trademark claimants to take domain names from prior registrants.

    ICANN’s core values refer to the “Internet Community.” That community is not just those with commercial interests, but especially those using the Net to communicate: the new blogger who wants a domain name to hang her weblog; the parent who wants an email address he controls; the critic who wants to criticize a business without having her home address and telephone number made public.

    ICANN needs a better way to hear and respond to the public Internet community, but so far, there’s little indication it’s listening. Without the at-large public, this “private-public partnership” looks a lot like a conspiracy in restraint of trade.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Symbolic TLDs Not Even Close to ICANN's Radar
    by Anonymous on Wednesday April 19 2006, @05:01PM (#16706)
    Symbolic TLDs Not Even Close to ICANN's Radar

    [Pay no attention to Bill Gate's and China's leaders as they add these TLDs]

    "Also cool is the AIGA page where the design association makes all the symbols available in EPS and GIF formats:

            This system of 50 symbol signs was designed for use at the crossroads of modern life: in airports and other transportation hubs and at large international events. Produced through a collaboration between the AIGA and the U.S. Department of Transportation, they are an example of how public-minded designers can address a universal communication need. ...
            These copyright-free symbols have become the standard for off-the-shelf symbols in the catalogues of U.S. sign companies."
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Anonymous poster issues
    by Anonymous on Friday April 21 2006, @08:18AM (#16708)
    ICANNwatch, the same anonymous poster who for months, if not much much longer, is at it again. You should really change your comment system.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    • Pain by Anonymous Saturday May 27 2006, @09:55PM
    "ICANN has accepted yet another proposal"
    by Anonymous on Friday April 21 2006, @05:04PM (#16713)
    "ICANN has accepted yet another proposal"

    Anyone can send ICANN $50,000 and a proposal. The
    check will be cashed and nothing will happen.

    $50,000 buys very little at ICANN these days.
    That barely covers a weekend for the ICANN staff
    to fly to Vegas for one of their working retreats.
    [ 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