Re: [ga] 305 Voters

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Ladi,

danged if it ain't a sawed off runt lookin for milk from its mama.  Damn
straight this is a legitimate and hard moral and philosophical battle.  I
play hard at the personal side and study night and day at the technical.  My
older children ask me to show them the windmills I am fighting, and my
younger ask what child I came closer to saving today. Those of us who want
to help must understand and fight for what is right in both arenas.
Satellite link ups and IPv16s have me well worried but not out classed. Us
dotcommoners will raise to the occassion.  One more serious IPv4 to
southheast  asia may help one more village Doctor which will save countless
children, one more political blocking of same may kill hundreds more.

We talk in the ether, but when I leave Stockholm I will go directly to
deltas where i will witness more tagedy at ICANNs hands. Oh no my friend
this is not an intellectual debate.

Sincerely,

"when men of brains debate trouble, men of trouble die" (ed 2001)

Ladi wrote:

> My personal general feeling is that technical issues simply cannot exist
> in isolation from policy issues. Trying to divide them cleanly is
> useless as one side will always need to understand the other at least on
> a basic level, unless we just want to degenerate into two groups
> pointing fingers at each other and never getting anything done. I point
> to the current email as a file transfer method issue occupying NANOG as
> my most recent example.
>
> By the same token, are "non-ICANN issues" really that far from "ICANN
> issues"? Not to start a new debate, but perhaps a form of the digital
> divide is why some people can effectively put up a fight against UDRP
> and others don't even bother. Perhaps a more unified approach is in
> order...
>
> And as a history major, I need to plug my own discipline (and my
> thesis): past models are also worth examining. Without thinking too
> hard, I would hazard a guess that the creation and professionalization
> of the scientific community is worth a look.
>
> ~Ladi
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf Of
> Cade,Marilyn S - LGA
> Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2001 1:48 PM
> To: 'William S. Lovell'
> Cc: ga@DNSO.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] 305 Voters
>
> I've been thinking that some of what "we" want to talk about really
> doesn't belong at ICANN at all, but that there a lots of interesting,
> bright, and involved people who are interested in ICANN, but really want
> to also debate, or socialize ideas bout non-ICANN areas.... digital
> divide; privacy on the net in general, security of
> applications/communications, etc.
>
> I think, like William, that there may be some models which we could look
> at. I am not holding up any examples, since I am searching. Your ASCAP
> and BMI examples are interesting ones. Some might suggest ISOC; others
> might suggest some of the other more technically oriented ... groups...
> but the point is that we should see if we can learn from any of them ,
> and from the other SOs about what might work...
>
> Thanks, William, I enjoyed reading your post, and it made me think
> more...
>
> Marilyn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William S. Lovell [mailto:wsl@cerebalaw.com]
> Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2001 1:43 PM
> To: Cade,Marilyn S - LGA
> Cc: ga@DNSO.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] 305 Voters
>
> "Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" wrote:
>
> > William, might it also be that many users of the Internet think that
> > it
> just
> > works, and they are busy running their personal lives, and their
> businesses,
> > and they want to take Internet operations for granted?
>
> Marilyn:
>
> That's really it in a nutshell. Also, the GA attempts to do stuff in the
> wrong place. The problem is that the GA is supposed to be a technical
> advisory body on domain name issues, where technical expertise is indeed
> necessary, but the GA more often falls into the process of carrying out
> what the "at-large" group would do, if there were such a thing. The
> attempts by Younger and Corliss to get things focussed on the actual
> "charter" of the GA by way of the mailing lists, instead of being a
> place to vent every gripe known (along with beating up the other guy,
> etc.), creates yet another thing to gripe about, and the real business
> gets lost.
>
> > For instance, I often speak to busienesses through trade associations
> about
> > ICANN. Most of the executives and managers whom I brief usually say:
> > glad you are paying attention; think that our association staff
> > should. Now, I have to get back to work. Give an update in about 3-4
> > months, won't you?
> >
> > I'm struggling to think about other organizations and how they have
> > developed "representative democracy".  I think it deserves some more
> > thoughtfulness.
>
> I gave the examples some time back of two organizations that are run
> quite professionally and serve their own special public very well. One
> of these is the National Writers Union (free lance writers) and ASCAP
> (songwriters)
> -- for which there is another one -- BMI.
>
> <snip>
>
> --
> 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

--
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