Re: [ga] At-Large

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Thomas Roessler wrote:

> It may be practically possible to create an ICANN membership somehow 
> along the way of a publicly listed company.  However, that's not at all 
> the point of what I wrote:  When I'm talking about feasibility, I also 
> mean _political_ _feasibility_: What can be achieved within the current 
> ICANN framework? What can the constituencies and board be convinced to 
> do?  Ultimately: What can governments be convinced to do? Rephrasing 
> that as a "lack of will" and pretending it's not a problem for this 
> reason doesn't bring this debate anywhere.

What got the "debate" to this sad point was people who kept creeping 
backwards as the anti-democracy interests of ICANN kept pushing forwards.

Here we are, and people are "debating" a system in which they get no
votes, no right to information, and no right to hold ICANN accountable.  
That system is a condition of debasement, infinitely distant from what is
right and proper.

All that ICANN has done is to create a powerless and toothless garden
club.  It's nothing but the old trick of a company union game wrapped with
internet buzz.

		--karl--





--
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