[Chapter-delegates] Internet Society Appointments to theNTIA/IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
Christian de Larrinaga
cdel at firsthand.net
Fri Jul 4 09:39:49 PDT 2014
Firstly from the top..
I wonder if the problem is less one of representation than of purpose?
If board members served a duty to the public good than simply to serve
the interests of "ICANN the corporation" whether that would be an
important start to build a more reflexive accountability at ICANN?
The other issue for ICANN in the future is whether decisions are made at
the board as in a traditional top down corporation or whether it is able
to delegate the other way and have them made within its constituencies
and only if contentious between such constituencies or GAC etc would
they get referred for board discussion to work out what course of action
or recommendations to make to try to resolve an issue.
This is relevant to the NTIA transition because all the discussions so
far surrounding the oversight or accountability of ICANN or a new body
assume the eventual governance model will be top down. That is the
accountability will need to be imposed from on top or from one side or
another.
Actually a bottom up approach is going to be much more realistic if the
board at the top so to speak is clearly focussed on the public good and
whose role is very largely one of co-ordination, community building (to
get things done in constituency bodies) and deal brokering when that is
required.
.01c
on voting by registrants.. I'm not against it provided it is one per
person / entity but I don't see having a vote as a key incentive to
change behaviour for many bona fide registrants who often have no clue
about DNS, ICANN and rely on a friend to register their name. After a
while things move on and the details go out of date. What is needed is a
way to jog these registrants without knocking them off the Internet.
One thought I had might be to setup a lost and found that shows up on
google search so that when a record goes wrong it gets to the top of the
search with links on how to fix it.
.01c
Christian
Vint Cerf wrote:
> separating businesses from individuals might still be a problem. Hard
> to say whether voting would overcome some preferences for anonymity in
> the database.
>
> v
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch
> <mailto:rhill at hill-a.ch>> wrote:
>
> If registrants could vote, then they would have an additional
> incentive to keep the WHOIS database up to date. Same as
> corporate shareholders: if they want to vote, they make sure that
> the company secretary has their current address.
>
> Best,
> Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Vint Cerf [mailto:vint at google.com
> <mailto:vint at google.com>]
> *Sent:* vendredi, 4. juillet 2014 16:48
> *To:* rhill at hill-a.ch <mailto:rhill at hill-a.ch>
> *Cc:* Evan Leibovitch; Chapter Delegates
> *Subject:* Re: [Chapter-delegates] Internet Society
> Appointments to theNTIA/IANA Stewardship Transition
> Coordination Group
>
> The WHOIS database would need to be a lot more solid, I guess,
> to make that work. There is also the question of users who are
> not domain name holders which draws me back to ALAC. I don't
> have a good answer here except to say that the "election" in
> the early years of ICANN proved problematic in many respects.
>
> v
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch
> <mailto:rhill at hill-a.ch>> 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
> <mailto:vint at google.com>]
> *Sent:* vendredi, 4. juillet 2014 13:12
> *To:* rhill at hill-a.ch <mailto: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
--
Christian de Larrinaga
FBCS, CITP, MCMA
-------------------------
@ FirstHand
-------------------------
+44 7989 386778
cdel at firsthand.net
-------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20140704/5e52fa9c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 599 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20140704/5e52fa9c/attachment.asc>
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list