Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    ICANN Bid for Independent Status Gets Cool Reception | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 25 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    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.
    Re:Pick up the phone!
    by Kieren McCarthy on Sunday April 22 2007, @01:13AM (#16944)
    User #4206 Info
    You've hit on something here Ed that I am still trying to work out how to deal with.

    Namely, how do you know what impact, if any, particular public comments have had on the finished product?

    If you look at it from the most positive perspective i.e. that every comment contributed is discussed at length by whatever group of people are looking at the issue in hand -- how does that group get across that it has considered every piece?

    The first solution that jumps to mind is that every comment is printed out and then gone through in the meeting. But you can see how if this was the set approach how it could very rapidly get out of hand and the meeting become stilted.

    Equally can or should ICANN mandate how meetings are carried out? Seems a bit controlling and unhelpful.

    But there needs to be some kind of system because if you assume the worst case scenario where the comments are ignored, such a system would mean that this wasn't possible and all comments would have to be involved in the process.

    The question I suppose is: what is the system by which you can demonstrate that everything has been considered without making it a chore or cumbersome or reducing the efficiency of the actual meeting?

    Is it a matter of staff producing a summary of comments and then making that publicly available plus insisting on open discussion of that document by the committee?

    Or is there a technological solution where comments can be ticked off, brief comments added online to explain the committee's feelings?

    Any and all suggestions welcome. I'm sure I can persuade someone to try out a pilot if I get such a system in place.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Pick up the phone! by Kieren McCarthy
    Re:Pick up the phone!
    by Anonymous on Sunday April 22 2007, @05:58AM (#16945)
    No offense Kieren, but your naivete is probably one reason you were chosen for the postition you now hold.

    Back in 2000 when Mike Roberts, Hans Kraaijenbrink, Esther Dyson, and those of their ilk were running the big show, true motives were never publicized. For instance, Image Online Design's application for .web was turned down at that time, because of Esther Dyson spewing nonsense like, "I don't like their (IOD's) business model." Meanwhile, behind closed doors, out of public earshot, Mike Roberts was more candid when asked if IOD had a snowball's chance in hell to have their application approved; "They (IOD) sued John Postel for Christ-sake."

    Kieren, ICANN has spoken out of both sides of its mouth for years, and it seems as though you've been hired because you're a fresh face with some street credibility. But please don't come wagging fingers at skeptics who for years have been watching a vindictive, arrogant ICANN deliver the DNS into the lap of the TM lobby.

    Before you tell us now wonderfully transparent ICANN now is, you should probably start digging into decisions made 7 years ago by the likes of Esther Dyson, who, in all her wisdom, took the application for .air and single-handedly changed it to .aero, telling the applicant (who shelled out $50,000.00 application fee for .air) to take it or leave it.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Pick up the phone!
    by ehasbrouck on Sunday April 22 2007, @08:27PM (#16946)
    User #3130 Info | http://hasbrouck.org
    Kieren asks, "how do you know what impact, if any, particular public comments have had on the finished product?"

    The first step is to observe the discussion: read the mailing list of the body that is supposed to "consider" the comments. Observe or audit their meetings. Read their correspondence, minutes, and other documents.

    If you can -- which with ICANN you usually can't. Does this commitee have a mailing list? Is it public? Even the Board of Directors doesn't have a public mailing list, although there have been repeated public mentions of the fact that they do have a (private) mailing list. Making Board discussions transparent would be a good place to start.

    "How does that group get across that it has considered every piece?"

    The way to get that across is to allow the public to observe its decsion-making process.

    "Can or should ICANN mandate how meetings are carried out?"

    Yes, ICANN's Bylaws do (and I think they should) mandate that ICANN *and* its subsidiary bodies must operate "to the maximum extent feasible" in an open and transparent manner. ICANN has to begin to engage with the meaning of that clause, especially the words "maximum extent feasible".

    If someone asks to see documents, or to observe or audit a meeting, ICANN is required to allow that.

    "Seems a bit controlling and unhelpful."

    If that's what you think, propose that the Bylaws be changed. In the meantime, it's your duty, like that of all ICANN Board members, officers, and staff, to act according to the Bylaws.

    "The question I suppose is: what is the system by which you can demonstrate that everything has been considered?"

    Make the process transparent. It would be a radical change for ICANN, but it's pretty simple to implement, *if* ICANN wants to do it.

    "... insisting on open discussion of that document by the committee?"

    All discussion of any document by any ICANN committee must be open.

    "I'm sure I can persuade someone to try out a pilot if I get such a system in place."

    I look forward to seeing that happen. Start with opening up the non-transparent mailing lists and meetings, and designating points of contact for requests for documents and records.
    [ 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