Re: [ga] Lies, damned lies, and votes.

["James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>]

Thomas, how gracious of you too.   I also look forward to your summary of GA
activities.     Jamie


----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Roessler" <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
To: <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 5:59 AM
Subject: [ga] Lies, damned lies, and votes.


: Note how the motion which drew fewer "yes" votes is promoted as the
: "most important" one in James Love's message to random-bits.
: ICANNwatch editor Ted Byfield even goes a step further: In his
: ICANNwatch piece at
: <http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=759>, he does not even
: mention motion 2.
:
: --
: Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
:
:
:
:
: ----- Forwarded message from James Love <james.love@cptech.org> -----
:
: From: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>
: To: "NCDNHC-discuss list" <discuss@icann-ncc.org>
: Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 05:41:19 -0400
: Subject: [ncdnhc-discuss] CPTech statement on GA rebid vote
: List-Id: Discussion List of Non-Commercial Domain Name Holders
Constituency  <discuss.icann-ncc.org>
:
:
: ----- Original Message -----
: From: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>
: To: <random-bits@lists.essential.org>
: Cc: <reform-comments@icann.org>
: Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 5:12 AM
: Subject: CPTech on vote to rebid ICANN contracts
:
:    [Note: CPTech statement on vote follows
:     summary of Motion 1]
:
: It isn't that common for an organization to vote to give
: others a chance to replace it, but that is what the ICANN
: DNSO "General Assembly" did yesterday.  The vote was
: controversial within ICANN, generating hundreds of missives
: to the GA discussion list, and resulting in the highest GA
: vote tally ever recorded (218 voters), and the highest rate
: of online voter participation (37.2 percent of registered
: voters) since the GA was created two years ago.
: (http://www.dnso.org/secretariat/b12.fullrecord.html)
:
: The most important vote was "Motion 1," the so-called
: "nuclear option," which called upon the US Department of
: Commerce to rebid its contracts with ICANN.  The vote on
: this motion was:
:
:                148 I FOR Motion 1 ("Request to US DoC")
:                 54 I vote AGAINST Motion 1
:                 15 I ABSTAIN regarding Motion 1
:
: A similar but somewhat more restrained motion 2 which
: criticized the ICANN board and its reform process also
: passed:
:
:                164 I vote FOR Motion 2 ("Reform principles")
:                 33 I vote AGAINST Motion 2
:                 19 I ABSTAIN regarding Motion 2
:
:
: Here is the guts of Motion 1:
:
: "The Internet Corporation for Assigned names and Numbers
: (ICANN) has dramatically changed the initial terms of
: reference for ICANN, and . . . these proposed changes have
: met extensive opposition in the Internet community . . .
: a new open competition would allow the U.S. Department of
: Commerce (the DoC) to consider both the ICANN Board proposal
: for restructuring, and alternatives offered by others for
: managing key Internet resources. . . The General Assembly of
: the Domain name Supporting Organization of Internet
: Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) asks the
: US Department of Commerce to have an open competition for
: the services now provided by ICANN, , provided that the new
: competition would address the need to develop an
: international framework for DNS management . . .
: privatization and internationalization of DNS services,
: consistent with the need for stability, but also innovation,
: competition and freedom."
:
:
: CPTech statement of the GA vote,
:
: "It is clear that the ICANN Board of Directors does not have
: the support of the Internet community, and now it is
: official that they do not have the support of their own
: public forum, and the only consensus that exists is to
: reject the ICANN board's proposed "reforms" for ICANN, and
: start over.   The ICANN board is rapidly dismantling every
: vehicle for democracy within ICANN, and this vote reminds
: everyone why.  The ICANN board and staff is seeking to
: impose an unpopular governance system on the Internet, and
: the only way they can do that is to suppress avenues for
: recording popular will.  The US Department of Commerce has
: to confront a painful fact, ICANN is not working, not
: listening, and not willing to heal itself.  There should be
: consequences for failures, and even non-profit organizations
: should face competition.  If ICANN can't tolerate elections
: for its board members, and isn't willing to limit its own
: powers in any meaningful way, it's time to think about
: replacing ICANN with something else.  There can and should
: be an open competition and a new debate about how the
: Internet should be managed.  The GA asked for an
: international privatized approach that addresses the need
: for Internet stability, but they also insisted on a system
: that protects innovation, competition and freedom.   These
: last values are the ones that the current ICANN board has
: ignored."    James Love, Dirctor, CPTech
:
:
:
: Full Text of motion 1
:
: Motion 1. "Request that US DoC hold open competition
:            for services now offered by ICANN"
: ------------------------------------------------------------
:
: WHEREAS the Internet Corporation for Assigned names and
: Numbers (ICANN) has dramatically changed the initial terms
: of reference for ICANN, and is proposing even further
: changes.
:
: WHEREAS these proposed changes have met extensive opposition
: in the Internet community and go even further from the
: original terms of reference.
:
: WHEREAS a new open competition would allow the U.S.
: Department of Commerce (the DoC) to consider both the ICANN
: Board proposal for restructuring, and alternatives offered
: by others for managing key Internet resources, while
: providing for a public record of the process for enhanced
: visibility.
:
: WHEREAS the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain name
: Supporting Organization (the DNSO) also reminds the DoC,
: that in the Green and the White Paper, the Government of the
: United States made it clear that it intends to withdraw from
: management of the Domain name System (the DNS).
:
:
: It is hereby RESOLVED that:-
:
: The General Assembly of the Domain name Supporting
: Organization of Internet
: Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) asks the
: US Department of Commerce to have an open competition for
: the services now provided by ICANN, provided that the new
: competition would address the need to develop an
: international framework for DNS management. An open
: competition should aim to achieve comprehensive
: privatization and internationalization of DNS services,
: consistent with the need for stability, but also innovation,
: competition and freedom.
:
: ------------------------------------------------------------
: Full text of Motion 2.
: "Basic principles for the ICANN Reform Process"
: ------------------------------------------------------------
:
: Whereas there are certain basic principles which have to be honored by an
: entity coordinating key Internet resources in order to gain the trust of
the
: Internet community,
:
: Whereas these principles include transparent process, broad input into
: policy-making, which must include meaningful individual  and
non-commercial
: participation, and accountability (including  independent review of
: decisions),
:
: Whereas there is a widespread perception that ICANN is moving away from
: these principles, in particular by stalling or abandoning processes for
the
: implementation of an independent review system and for participation of
the
: Internet community at large in ICANN oversight,
:
: the General Assembly of the DNSO reminds the ICANN Board that it must
adhere
: to these principles in any reform proposal and make
: it sufficiently known how proposed reforms provide improvements regarding
: these principles.   Should the ICANN reform process fail to provide
: significant improvements in these regards, it is the international
Internet
: community's and governments' task to consider how all of or parts of
ICANN's
: responsibilities could be transferred smoothly to one or more new or
: existing organizations which are accountable to the international Internet
: community as a whole, have clearly defined missions and are not only under
: the sole control of a national department of commerce, without endangering
: the stability of the DNS or the Internet as a whole. In the meantime, all
: groups of the Internet community are called to deliver their input on
: reforms needed.
: ------------------------------------------------------------
:
:
: --------------------------------
: James Love mailto:james.love@cptech.org
: http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
:
:
: _______________________________________________
: Discuss mailing list
: Discuss@icann-ncc.org
: http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
:
:
: ----- End forwarded message -----
: --
: This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
: Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
: ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
: Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
:
:
:


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html