[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ga] ICANN bylaws changes

Mark C. Langston wrote:
> Among the other problems already mentioned, is anyone else disgusted
> with the clause (Art II, S2) that states that ICANN can vary the At Large
> membership fee for certain individuals?  I have a prediction:  The
> At Large membership will come into being wholly formed.  It will be
> ISOC.  And the fee will be a small percentage of ISOC chapter dues.

How very perceptive of you. :-)

> ICANN has a prebuilt 5,000-person group in ISOC, and I have no doubt they'll
> rush to use it.

And it's properly distributed geographically, too. Just like Pisanty
and Abril i Abril.

> Of course, any other person who wishes to join the At Large membership,
> with no rights, no voice whatsoever, will have to pay a fee, since the
> At Large membership is the cash cow ICANN will milk to fund its
> exclusive junkets here and abroad, and to pay off Jones Day.  That is,
> it'll cover those costs not already covered by large corporate
> contributions (Cisco, AT&T, IBM, etc.)

That's what the U.S. government does. Why not ICANN?

> Furthermore, and perhaps the most sickening, is the following inclusion
> in the next Section:
>   "The Corporation shall, pursuant to policies adopted by the Board and
>    consistent with other policies of the Corporation, provide a method
>    for Members to communicate with other Members in such ways and under
>    such circumstances as the Board determines are appropriate and
>    desirable."
> Section 4 then states:
>  "f) Use of the methods made available pursuant to Section 3 of this
>   Article II for an improper purpose or for any
>   purpose not approved by the Corporation"
> as a reason for termination of the At Large membership for an individual.
> In short, ICANN can revoke your At Large membership, for which you paid,
> if you say things they don't agree with on the official At Large
> list.
> The ICANN BoD will dictate how we will communicate with each other?
> Under circumstances they deem "appropriate and desirable"?  Excuse the
> hell out of me, but I will NOT be censored by the ICANN BoD.

Somehow, I don't think you're going to be invited to be an at-large
member, Mark.

> Anyone up for forming the official ICANN At-Large Membership mailing
> list before they create their censored version?  Let's just declare the
> IFWP list the ICANN At-Large membership list and be done with it.

Won't work. Has to be approved by ICANN. Like the NCDNHC mailing
list. ISOC was able to control the non-commercial constituency of
the DNSO because ICANN allowed it to run the constituency mailing
list. Smart, huh?

> Finally, Section 6 requires the 5,000 people be Members before the
> At Large board can be formed.  This means that 5,000 must submit to this
> and pey their fees.  Then the BoD will allow the At Large membership to
> put foth candidates, just like the current DNSO BoD candidate fiasco,
> and the ICANN BoD will decide who gets to be on the At Large council,
> the only real voice the At Large membership has.

Sure. It worked for the DNSO, why not do it again for the At-Large?


There'll be more. Wait and see.

> Also, Article 5, Section 9c4, states that if at any time the At Large
> membership drops below 5000, the At Large Board Directors (a full HALF
> OF THE ICANN BoD) shall not serve until the At Large membership again
> goes above 5000.  Bingo, ICANN and various large bodies can now manipulate
> the gross power structure of the ICANN BoD to their own ends simply by
> having their members withdraw their membership from the At Large
> body, dropping the membership below 5000.

All it will take is a word from ISOC.

> Article VI, Section 2j is eliminated, doing away with the DNSO
> grievance committee.  There goes any recourse we would have had.

It doesn't matter. The grievance committee would have been
controlled the same people, just like the "Independent Review
Committeee", which was chosen by the Board.

> These changes are absolutely disgusting.

Aren't they? Brought to you by Andrew McLaughlin, the man who
brought you the ICANN Registrar Accreditation Policy and other

But it will get worse. When unscrupulous authoritarians are allowed
to get away with something, they always try for more. That's their
nature. The only hope of stopping ICANN was a year ago, when the
unelected board was announced. That should never have been allowed
to pass. Once it was allowed to pass, everything that's happening
now had to follow. But people were too dazed and too awed to protest
sufficiently. And those who did protest, like the BWG, were tricked
into submitting by being convinced that their views would be
accepted and included. They were co-opted. Only the ORSC saw ICANN
for what it really is, and disowned it. Everyone else was tricked.
Some because they couldn't see the truth, others because they wanted
to be tricked.

Michael Sondow           I.C.I.I.U.     http://www.iciiu.org
Tel. (718)846-7482                        Fax: (603)754-8927