Who is the .org consultant?
Date: Tuesday July 23 2002, @04:44AM
Topic: .org

Anonymous writes "Letter to Stuart Lynn

Dear Stuart,

On the very same day that you write to Nancy Victory, http://www.icann.org/correspondence/icann-to-doc-19jul02.htm reassuring the US Department of Commerce that you will take better account of the concerns of the various supporting organizations and advisory committees, you also had the gall to seek direct authorization from a 6 person, self-appointed, non-elected Committee that has all the powers of the full Board, but none of its checks and balances - for explicit permission to disburse more than a third of the .org application fees, some $125,000, to an independent consultant, the purpose of which is to "partly examine .org applications". All that cash and for only half the job?"

The $125,000 this self-nominated, self-appointed, self-serving committee authorized you to spend were raised in fact from the future prospective unsuccessful applicants of .org. Were these impacted parties consulted before the decision was made to spend their money on this nameless, faceless consultant?

http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-19jul02.htm

And more important, who is "the consultant" exactly? Would it be correct to assume Joe Sims is connected in some way to this disbursement? What possible reason can there be to keep details of this engagement secret. Was the reason sufficiently compelling to ignore ICANN's founding principles of openness and transparency?

How is such behavior by you and your Staff consistent with a bottom up policy development process? Consistent with the DoC directive? Why is this information not on the front page of the ICANN website, as New and Noteworthy?

I think you owe the community an explanation, don't you?

Sincerely,

Joanna Lane

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Who is the .org consultant? | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 21 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.
Re: Who is the .org consultant?
by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Tuesday July 23 2002, @05:44AM (#8026)
User #2810 Info
I noticed that lack of disclosure too, but wondered less about Jones Day (that is, Joe Sims) and more about whom they might have picked to replace the Arthur Andersen consultants that ICANN used for the evaluation of new TLDs. These days the consultants could be otherwise discredited by the time they report, or they could already be discredited. If it is correct that Robert Blokzijl hasn't been re-(s)elected to ICANN's Board, perhaps they'll give it to him. I'm joking, but I suspect there will be controversy when the consultant is named. Finding a truly impartial outsider seems not to be something ICANN can manage. -g
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re: Who is the .org consultant?
by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Tuesday July 23 2002, @11:13PM (#8068)
User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
Love 'em or hate 'em (polarisation is popular these days, it seems), they are jsut doing their job. Sure, we would do it differently, but it's not our responsibility. It - currently, at least - is theirs. Let them get on with it. The more the screw up, the more chance ICANN will be rebid. The more they do the right thing, well, then that's good news.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re: Who is the .org consultant?
by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Tuesday July 23 2002, @07:35AM (#8036)
User #2810 Info
Now that is just about as absurd as it being Blokzijl, and therefore halfways believable coming out of the ICANN funhouse. Still, it would be nice if you could provide a credible reference for your assertion. -g
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re: Who is the .org consultant?
by PeterBarron (pebarron@hotmail.com) on Tuesday July 23 2002, @08:17AM (#8040)
User #3240 Info | http://www.icannwatch.org/
It's not a big deal until the $125k is figured in. Then it becomes a big deal.

Stuart: Hm, we need to find a use for this money, since we already know who we're going to approve.

Louie: Well, Kent's been a good boy, let's throw him a bone.

Kent: I know all. I see all. I tell nobody but you.

Stuart: Okay, suits me. Here, Kent, here's $125k, craft me a report that gives the most favourable nod to you know who

Kent: You know who? Karl Auerbach?

Louis: No, you idiot, he's the other you know who. This is the you know who who gets .ORG.

Kent: Oh, yeah, them.

++Peter

(with the acknowledgement that I have no idea who the mystery consultant is. But I do think I know who you know who is)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Name of the boat
by isquat on Tuesday July 23 2002, @02:40PM (#8057)
User #3363 Info | http://i.squ.at/
Invita invidia.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.




  • This article comes from ICANNWatch
    http://www.icannwatch.org/

    The URL for this story is:
    http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/23/084440