Public Comments Sought on GNSO Improvements

The Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review Working
Group has released a "Draft Working Document on GNSO
Improvements" that presents the Working Group's
initial thinking on, and raises questions about, how
to improve the GNSO, for discussion with Community at
the upcoming ICANN Meeting in San Juan and for public
comment through the ICANN website. This working draft
does not reach any definitive recommendations or
conclusions at this time. It is posted to encourage
further public discussion and comment, and it does not
represent the position of the Working Group, the Board
Governance Committee, or the Board. 
19 June 2007

http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-19jun
07.htm

key document:  http://www.icann.org/announcements/
draft-wg-bgc-gnso-improvements-18jun07.pdf


     
____________________________________________________________
________________________
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative
vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yah
oo.com/green_center/ 

Danny Younger wrote:
> The Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review Working
> Group has released a "Draft Working Document on
GNSO
> Improvements" that presents the Working Group's
> initial thinking on, and raises questions about, how
> to improve the GNSO

I read it.  It continues the ICANN tradition of creating its
own taxonomy of 
interests and putting people into boxes inside boxes.

Let's see ... it suggests several kinds of constituencies
for individual people 
- people who act as non-commercial agents, people who act as
academics, people 
who act as ... you get the point.

And it blandly says "gee, ICANN has always allowed new
constituencies" - the 
truth of that is belied by the treatment of ICANN when it
refused to consider 
the IDNO, the constituency for individual domain name
owners.

And yet, after all of the report's micro-division of
individuals, it does not 
make a similar dissection of commercial interests - there is
not a constituency 
into which to put companies with green logos and companies
incorporated in 
Alabama, etc.

Why are commercial interests once again given a free ride
while individuals are 
chopped up into pieces?  Might I suggest that certain
commercial interests like 
the stability they get from a policy of "divide and
conquer".

The report fails to recognize the logical conclusion of its
strategy of 
micro-dissection: One constituency for each and every
person.  In which case 
why the constituency mechanism at all?

Nor does the report consider sunsets on existing
constituencies, particularly 
those established by fiat at ICANN's start.

Overall it is a pretty weak report.  It continues the ICANN
tradition of 
evading meaningful participation by people and elevating the
participation of 
commercial aggregates.

Corporatism.

		--karl--

Danny and all,

  Interesting.  What yet again, it seems odd but repeated
refrain
that this WG didn't send a report on it's own findings.  My
only
two guesses are that either this WG never reached any
definitive
conclusions, or were so afraid of repercussions from the
stakeholders they didn't prepare a report to reflect
whatever
conclusions/findings they agreed upon.  If either of these
are
so it again reflects a lack of leadership ability which has
been
sense ICANN's beginning, a hallmark.

Danny Younger wrote:

> The Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review Working
> Group has released a "Draft Working Document on
GNSO
> Improvements" that presents the Working Group's
> initial thinking on, and raises questions about, how
> to improve the GNSO, for discussion with Community at
> the upcoming ICANN Meeting in San Juan and for public
> comment through the ICANN website. This working draft
> does not reach any definitive recommendations or
> conclusions at this time. It is posted to encourage
> further public discussion and comment, and it does not
> represent the position of the Working Group, the Board
> Governance Committee, or the Board.
> 19 June 2007
>
> http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-19jun
07.htm
>
> key document:  http://www.icann.org/announcements/
draft-wg-bgc-gnso-improvements-18jun07.pdf
>
>      
____________________________________________________________
________________________
> Park yourself in front of a world of choices in
alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
> http://autos.yah
oo.com/green_center/

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k
members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not
with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the
burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied
by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]
============================================================
===
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data
security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1ix.netcom.com
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827

Joop and all,

  I agree that "Oh well" is hardly a good
response.

  What the GNSO is wanting however is anyone's guess, which
in fact makes this so called report unclear and seemingly
intentionionly which shows how poorly ICANN and the GNSO
communicates.

However what you suggest is secondary to the need for an
Individual registrants constituency and a REAL At Large
membership.

Joop Teernstra wrote:

>    At 11:05 a.m. 20/06/2007, you wrote:
> >This disclaimer is just too broad. I gather no one
has any position
> on
> >anything at this time.
> >Oh well.
> >Eric
>
> Eric,
>
> They want recommendations and conclusions from us. They
say that
> nothing
> has been cast in stone yet, although, of course, if you
don't move
> your
> feet , the cement will harden into a new structure and
the
> representation
> of the at large stakeholders will be provided top-down.
(with all the
> negative long-term consequences for ICANN and the
hapless
> "representatives")
>
> "Oh, well"  is not the best answer.
>
> My recommendation is that the ICANN Board now take the
initiative to
> invite
> Individual Domain Name Owners to form a recognized GNSO
constituency,
> its
> funding provided for in the 2007 and 2008 budget and
its internal
> democracy
> supervised by the ombudsman and a committee of 3
(elected) Board
> members.
>
> My conclusions are suspended until this happens.
>
> Is there anyone here who  supports that?
>
> >Danny Younger <dannyyoungeryahoo.com> wrote:
> >The Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review
Working
> >Group has released a "Draft Working Document
on GNSO
> >Improvements" that presents the Working
Group's
> >initial thinking on, and raises questions about,
how
> >to improve the GNSO, for discussion with Community
at
> >the upcoming ICANN Meeting in San Juan and for
public
> >comment through the ICANN website. This working
draft
> >does not reach any definitive recommendations or
> >conclusions at this time. It is posted to
encourage
> >further public discussion and comment, and it does
not
> >represent the position of the Working Group, the
Board
> >Governance Committee, or the Board.
> >19 June 2007
> >
> >http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-19jun
07.htm
> >
> >key document:
> >http://www.ic
>
nn.org/announcements/draft-wg-bgc-gnso-improvements-18jun07.
pdf
> >
>
> --Joop--
> h
ttp://www.pollingbooth.info/generalassemblysignup/
> www.icannatlarge.com
> www.democracy.org/idno
>
>
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k
members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not
with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the
burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied
by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]
============================================================
===
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data
security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1ix.netcom.com
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827

Karl and all,

  Indeed, but terribly and yet factually unfortunate.

Karl Auerbach wrote:

> Danny Younger wrote:
> > The Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review
Working
> > Group has released a "Draft Working Document
on GNSO
> > Improvements" that presents the Working
Group's
> > initial thinking on, and raises questions about,
how
> > to improve the GNSO
>
> I read it.  It continues the ICANN tradition of
creating its own taxonomy of
> interests and putting people into boxes inside boxes.
>
> Let's see ... it suggests several kinds of
constituencies for individual people
> - people who act as non-commercial agents, people who
act as academics, people
> who act as ... you get the point.
>
> And it blandly says "gee, ICANN has always allowed
new constituencies" - the
> truth of that is belied by the treatment of ICANN when
it refused to consider
> the IDNO, the constituency for individual domain name
owners.
>
> And yet, after all of the report's micro-division of
individuals, it does not
> make a similar dissection of commercial interests -
there is not a constituency
> into which to put companies with green logos and
companies incorporated in
> Alabama, etc.
>
> Why are commercial interests once again given a free
ride while individuals are
> chopped up into pieces?  Might I suggest that certain
commercial interests like
> the stability they get from a policy of "divide
and conquer".
>
> The report fails to recognize the logical conclusion of
its strategy of
> micro-dissection: One constituency for each and every
person.  In which case
> why the constituency mechanism at all?
>
> Nor does the report consider sunsets on existing
constituencies, particularly
> those established by fiat at ICANN's start.
>
> Overall it is a pretty weak report.  It continues the
ICANN tradition of
> evading meaningful participation by people and
elevating the participation of
> commercial aggregates.
>
> Corporatism.
>
>                 --karl--

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k
members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not
with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the
burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied
by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]
============================================================
===
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data
security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1ix.netcom.com
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827