| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.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
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
This is getting ridiculous.
Now you appear to be implying that the President's Strategy Committee is secretive. You even ran a long post of it [icannwatch.org] - on this site - back in August last year - more than six months ago.
I have been trying for ages to get people involved in this - I have spoken to lots of people and I have posted news stories about the committee and where it was going.
I have even personally phoned into two open and public meetings of the committee and asked questions about it. Most recently I created an entire website that had as its first event a president's strategy committee meeting and where anyone could add comments and ask questions that would then be put directly and publicly to the committee.
If there is no other input, what on earth do you expect a committee to do except run with what it has come up with?
Don't start complaining after the event and - yet again - suggest that there is some kind of conspiracy at work. If you don't like something, say so when people are actually having the meeting, not once they have held three meeting public meetings and heard nothing back.
I wish ICANNWatch would switch its focus to involving people rather than complaining about what comes out after a massive lack of involvement.
If you want any help, if you can suggest what could be done to improve public participation, if you can suggest changes to improve the process, please just contact me.
Kieren
General manager of public participation, ICANN
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
During the two years I spent on the ALAC, ICANN's board an staff acted out a shared fantasy that it was just a matter of time, and not very much time, until the DOC wrapped up its contracts with ICANN at which point ICANN would become master of its own destiny, subject to nobody but the bottom-up consensus based processes that have brought us such acclaimed public successes as the Add Grace Period, the .MUSEUM TLD, the Verisign sellout^Wsettlement, and the Registerfly collapse and likely loss of all their registrant info.
Meanwhile back in the reality-based community, the USDOC has made it quite clear that they're never letting go of ICANN, and in view of the alternatives, that's OK with anyone who depends on the Internet to actually work.
So this particular exercise is consistent with ICANN's past behavior, but since it has no chance of changing anything, I wouldn't waste a lot of time getting upset about it.
|
|
|
|
[ 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
|
