ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[ga] Fw: The whole ALAC structure is misconceived


Vittorio, Denise, Esther and the ICANN Board
 
The ALAC public forum page states that contributions will be published in their public forum. I sent the mail (below) 6 days ago and it still hasn't appeared.
 
Does this mean that the contributions of individual users are not welcome unless they support the ICANN Board?
 
Is the ALAC Public Forum truly "public" and set up for the benefit of ordinary internet users, or are unpopular contributions censored?
 
Please could you post my previous mail.
 
Richard Henderson
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 11:32 PM
Subject: The whole ALAC structure is misconceived

As an individual internet user, I do not recognise ALAC's authority to organise on my behalf.
 
I believe ALAC is a top-down invention, initiated by the ICANN Board, to protect its own interests.
 
I believe an umbrella organisation for internet users should (and probably will) be set up outside ICANN, in order to operate critically and independently over issues concerning the DNS.
 
The RALOs are not only flawed in their proposed constitution, they are unacceptable in principle, because they presuppose that ICANN is the right "home" for the worldwide organisation of an "at large" community.
 
This is like suggesting that a "watchdog" organisation should be set up and overseen by the very people who would benefit from being "watched".
 
It is the very lack of democratic accountability, and the top-down autocracy of a self-sustaining Board, which concerns many people. And what is ALAC? An effort to legitimise the "reform" process of expelling elected At Large representatives on the Board; a top-down initiative existing for the benefit of the Board, who by paying lip-service to an "invented" at large process, can suggest to DoC and the public that they have integrity of intent; an exercise in damage limitation, to "contain" the most critical constituency and limit its influence.
 
What efforts have been made to ask the individual users who seek to participate in DNS matters, what structure and organisation THEY want? Polls of many of the most regular individual participants in your forums and lists clearly show a majority opposed to the RALO structure being set up in relationship to ICANN, and show an overwhelming mistrust of the ICANN Board, Denise Michel, and Esther Dyson (no personal slur intended - just an observation of their failure to win over individual users in general).
 
Who asked for this ALAC / RALO initiative?
 
I repeat my opening comment:
 
As an individual internet user, I do not recognise ALAC's authority to organise on my behalf.
 
ALAC is a sham, founded for the wrong reasons, in the interests of a Board which is regarded with disdain by many in the internet community.
 
The structure I propose is one which begins with asking 1000's of internet users to organise themselves, gets them to define their own identity and purposes, and creates "clear water" between them and ICANN.
 
Only by shifting the organisation *outside* of ICANN can the process gain any credibility.
 
ICANN is just playing games with the user community. Just as it set up the ALSC and then ignored its decisions (because they voiced user wishes for democratic representation), it is setting up the ALAC only as an instrument of its own convenience.
 
An independently organised At Large, with proper one-person-one-vote representation, is the only set up which can claim the authority to represent me if I choose to take part.
 
Internet users, and the At Large, must determine their organisation and their objectives and their processes for themselves.
 
ALAC is just an invention.
 
 
with regards,
 
 
Richard Henderson
 
 


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>