[Chapter-delegates] Internet Society Appointments to theNTIA/IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
Carlos M. Martinez
carlosmarcelomartinez at gmail.com
Fri Jul 4 07:24:00 PDT 2014
And what would you propose to do with the second ´N´that appears in the
ICANN name ?
On 7/4/14, 11:21 AM, Richard Hill wrote:
> Dear Vint,
>
> I agree that it might not be feasible to organize a global election of
> the ICANN Board ty the citizens of the world, or by the users of the
> Internet.
>
> That's why I suggest instead that the ICANN Board be elected by
> registrants (holders) of domain names. That is quite feasible using
> existing technologies and databases. I realize that some registrants
> use anonimity services, but it would be up to them to declare
> themselves as registrants if they wish to participate in the election,
> if not they would simply be absentees.
>
> Best,
> Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Vint Cerf [mailto:vint at google.com]
> *Sent:* vendredi, 4. juillet 2014 13:12
> *To:* rhill at hill-a.ch
> *Cc:* Evan Leibovitch; Chapter Delegates
> *Subject:* Re: [Chapter-delegates] Internet Society Appointments
> to theNTIA/IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
>
> Richard,
>
> the idea that there should be a global election for board members
> of ICANN by citizens of the world and users of the Internet was
> then and I think still is unworkable. Qualifying the electorate
> and running a verifiable election (ie, free of fraud) via the
> Internet is still out of the question. In places like Estonia
> where strong authentication is available it appears possible to
> achieve such an objective but this isn't feasible today on a
> global scale. I think the At-Large mechanism is about the best one
> can do along these lines for now.
>
> vint
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch
> <mailto:rhill at hill-a.ch>> wrote:
>
> Dear Evan,
>
> I fully agree with you that it would be better if ICANN were
> ultimately accountable to all the world's Internet users (or
> maybe even to all the world's people, since I believe we all
> want all people to use the Internet).
>
> As you say below, the initial structure of ICANN did allow for
> significant influence by users, but this was later modified to
> reduce that influence.
> If we can come up with a practical scheme allowing all users
> to excercise control over ICANN's accountability, I would be
> all for it.
>
> If not, then at least let's implement accountability by
> registrants, which is not perfect (for the reasons you say)
> but surely better than the current setup which has the
> drawbacks that you outline below.
>
> Best,
> Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* evanleibovitch at gmail.com
> <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>
> [mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com
> <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>]*On Behalf Of *Evan
> Leibovitch
> *Sent:* jeudi, 3. juillet 2014 22:39
> *To:* Richard Hill
> *Cc:* Eric Burger; Chapter Delegates
> *Subject:* Re: [Chapter-delegates] Internet Society
> Appointments to theNTIA/IANA Stewardship Transition
> Coordination Group
>
> On 3 July 2014 12:09, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch
> <mailto:rhill at hill-a.ch>> wrote:
>
> In democracies, the ultimate authority (parliament) is
> elected by all those affected, it is not chosen by a
> NomCom.
>
>
> That's because the ICANN "Nominating Committee" is misnamed.
>
> What ICANN has is a selection committee. A true
> *NOMINATING* Committee would create a ballot of eligible
> candidates from which an electorate would choose
> representatives. It's that last little step -- having an
> electorate -- that ICANN has consciously dispensed with.
> It's why ICANN has worked so hard to evade the traditional
> structure of nonprofits (such as our Chapter's) whose
> Boards are accountable to a membership.
>
> Once upon a time there were direct elections to ICANN,
> which were gamed. The response to gaming was to eliminate
> elections, rather than address the gaming issue. Perhaps
> that over-reaction needs to be revisited, especially now
> that e-voting tech has advanced so much lately.
>
> My suggestion is that the ultimate oversigh for
> ICANN's economic regulatory function should be the
> end-users, that is the registrants of domain names
> (people/organizations that hold domain name
> registrations).
>
>
>
> End users != registrants.
>
> This error occurs frequently within ICANN, and is a
> constant source of required vigilance.
>
> End users are the people sitting at screens or on their
> mobiles, who access the Internet without any need for a
> domain name or intention to possess one. I reject the
> assertion by many in the domain industry that everyone
> needs to own a domain, that each person on earth is just a
> potential registrant who hasn't yet been adequately
> marketed to.
>
> Among the current family of registrants -- owning a
> substantial chunk of the total domain name pool -- are
> name speculators and squatters. ICANN's tolerance of their
> presence creates artificial scarcity, raises the cost of
> Internet entry to startup businesses, and causes
> legitimate site and brand owners to needlessly register
> defensive names. (They also dramatically inflate the total
> number of extant domains, which is now arguably a source
> of ICANN's own financial dependence. But that's a
> different thread.)
>
> In this family are also those who create domain names with
> intent to defraud. This is why the Red Cross request for
> domain name protection came in for special attention at
> the ICANN Board recently (supported by the GAC and ALAC),
> why the lack of enforced WHOIS accuracy has become a
> source of controversy, and why the ALAC continues to
> challenge the utility of gTLD "Public Interest
> Committments" over the protests of the domain industry.
>
> So, Richard, I must take issue with your definition. While
> the interests of registrants often have much in common
> with those of end users, they are most certainly not 100%
> in sync and occasionally in direct opposition.
>
> Registrants have their own constituencies within the
> "Non-Contracted House" half of ICANN's GNSO, from which
> they protect their interests. That's not At-Large, which,
> like ISOC, exists to assert the perspective of end-users
> -- the billions outside ICANN's direct revenue stream who
> are nonetheless impacted by its actions.
>
> - Evan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically
> subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the
> Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20140704/6041f5aa/attachment.htm>
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list