RE: [ga] THIS FRIDAY end the nomination's time...

[Mikki Barry <ooblick@netpolicy.com>]

At 6:07 PM +0100 12/2/99, R.Gaetano@iaea.org wrote:
>Because I can't believe, not even for a moment, that people like Roeland
>Meyer, Mikki Barry, Ellen Rony, Karl Auerbach, and so on, and so forth, are
>giving up.


Speaking solely for myself, I am very tired.  I have been 
participating in this for 5 years, and before that through the CIX, 
through the Internet Business Association, and through my old 
software company.  I have fought long and hard, and have enjoyed the 
tiny amount of progress we have actually made.  However, I have done 
this at great personal cost - both financial and personal.  While 
paying my own way and flying around the world for individuals and 
small businesses, I have sorely neglected my law practice, my 
physical and emotional well being, and most importantly, my daughter. 
Something has to give.  I am seeing NO positives right now and 
significant negatives to my participation.  The ICANN bylaws are ever 
changing at the whim of the only partially elected board.  The UDRP 
has been adopted in flagrant violation of the mandate for "technical 
management only."  The trademark interests, not happy with the trump 
card they were gifted with, went even further and pushed the 
"cybersquatting bill" down America's throat by attaching it to a 
"must adopt" bill.   The SBA has called for a concrete review policy. 
Nothing has been said about it.  The popular candidate for the Board, 
Karl Auerbach, was not voted in by the names council after "horse 
trading" in violation of the bylaws regarding going to the names 
council for support once you were a candidate.  IBM, MCI and CORE 
control the board, control the constituencies, and will likely 
control the GA.  There is STILL no constituency for individuals or 
small business interests.

So what have we accomplished for 5 years of fighting?  There is no 
mandate for freedom of speech on this most important medium ever 
created.  "E-commerce" is in our faces, and flourishing despite 
ICANN, yet there is no protection for those who built the Internet 
and made it the robust medium that supports xmas shopping on line, 
and .com IPO after IPO.  I feel we have not accomplished very much at 
all.

>
>Because I can't think that all the people that have participated to these
>debates in the last years, often providing their criticism, but often in a
>constructive way, are now leaving the floor to the "yes-men" and to the
>"no-men" (i.e. the people for which everything is fine, and the people for
>which everything is broken, both categories of people having in common the
>same lack of interest in what the situation "really" is, and how it could be
>amended).


Insanity is often described as doing the same thing over and over and 
expecting a different outcome.  By that definition, I am insane.  I 
have tried very hard, sometimes spending 40 hours per week on email 
lists alone.  I attempted online participation in ICANN after trying 
in person participation through the IFWP process.  I did not feel 
that my participation was valued or useful to anyone.  I do not feel 
it made a difference.  And yes, I do believe that the game is 
stacked, the outcome was mandated well prior to the death of Jon 
Postel, and the phrase "all decisions have been made, you can go home 
now" was true from the Geneva IFWP meeting onward.

so, while I am not completely out, I am looking toward other 
priorities.  The hard cold fact is that I have other things to do 
with my life.  I am going to pursue them.  What little left over time 
I have may be used to continue fighting, but it certainly won't be as 
much as I've already poured in.

I suppose that in a way this is giving up and a cop out.  However, 
please remember that almost everyone involved with this process 
actually gets paid doing it.  In comparison, I go begging to get 
funding for DNRC so that we can continue.

>
>Because I can't accept that we renounce to have the possibility of having a
>voice in the process for everybody, including the individuals that are not
>part of any constituency, just because were not successful up to now.

If there was a glimmer of hope, I might agree with you, Roberto.  But 
at every turn, SANE dissenting voices are either given lip service, 
or are totally ignored.  I see no hope for individuals to have full 
representation.  I see no way for small businesses or small non 
profit organizations to have a voice given that the constituency 
system has gone so very wrong and is so skewed towards groups that 
ALREADY have the power.  6 business constituencies (including 
intellectual propery interests who have one little tiny peeping voice 
to counter their views, and that voice may be silenced because we 
can't afford to pay for our constituency votes).  One non-commercial 
constituency.   NO constituencies for individuals, the largest group 
of Internet users, and those who frankly have the most to lose.

I feel guilty saying all of this, but that's the way I see it.