NAIS Responds to Lynn Plan
Date: Saturday March 02 2002, @07:47AM
Topic: Membership Issues

The NGO and Academic Internet Study (NAIS) has weighed in with its response to the Lynn Plan. By NAIS standards, maybe by any standard, this is a firm but polite response. Given, however, that the Lynn plan basically tells the NAIS and like-minded parties to find a short pier and take a long walk, it could have been a lot tougher.

The NAIS notes, accurately, that were the ICANN Board to use the Lynn report as an excuse to defer action on the ALSC recommendations it would abridge its own processes and also effectively ensure that the next elections could not be held on schedule. Not to decide is to decide. The NAIS also complains, with much justice, that Lynn plan fails to provide "adequate support" for "openness, transparency, inclusiveness, and participation".

Politeness begins to win out over firmness (and reality) in the concluding paragraph, where the NAIS says that,

we believe that the appropriateness of the Lynn reforms will not be clear without an explanation as to what the core mission activities are. We urge Dr. Lynn to elaborate on his own conception of ICANN's technical coordination mission, to define the activities that constitute that mission, and to continue to explore mechanisms to ensure compliance with that mission.
As David Post explained on ICANNWatch a few days ago, the Lynn Plan is nothing less than a blueprint for mission creep. One would like to say that politely asking for clarification of the obvious provides a formula for a face-saving retreat, and indeed life often works that way. But it's never happened before with ICANN.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
NAIS Responds to Lynn Plan | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 1 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.
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

  • This article comes from ICANNWatch

    The URL for this story is: