At 01:00 PM 7/30/00, vinton g. cerf wrote:
and I replied:
Ronda,
Hi Vint,
It is thoroughly disheartening to see one of
the founding fathers of the Internet become
just another run-of-the-mill ICANN apologist.
have you taken time to look into the numbers of people trying to
register? do you know what the planning estimates were before
registration campaigns were initiated by various organizations?
There's an old saying --
"A lack of planning on your part, does
not constitute an emergency on our part."
Frankly, even calling those bogus Membership
Committee processes "planning" is a joke. If
anything, it was an exercise in "how do we
give the *appearances* of accountability and
representation, without really doing so."
If ICANN was so concerned about doing studies
about representation before proceeding, then why
didn't they worry about "representation" when the
initial board was announced? Why didn't they
worry about studies when the DNSO structure
(another gamed entity) was announced?
What's truly ironic is the double standard that
applies to user representation. Why do people
who were initially funded by the U.S. Government
(with U.S. taxpayer dollars) somehow feel that
they have some kind of God-given right to assume
control over ICANN, and make these decisions for
all Netizens of the World?
The planning numbers for registration were on the order of 10,000
people.
A case of bad planning, or gaming gone bad?
I'll remind you that ICANN was originally promoted
as some obscure technical coordination society, despite
repeated claims from the outside that it was much more
important than that (Post, Froomkin, Mueller, et al.)
Now that the Internet community realizes that they've
been lied to, they want to participate in the process.
I can't blame them. In fact, if I thought for a minute
that my vote would make a difference, I would join in a
heartbeat (or at least *try* and join :-).
I now know better than that :-(
Jay.
As of a few days ago something like 145,000 people had
sent in raw registrations. Keep in mind also that there is a
PIN number that has to be sent by mail. There is a calendar
schedule that ICANN is trying to keep for the election itself,
so the PINs have to get to the voters in time for that.
Every possible effort was made to increase the rate at which
registrations could be processed and we've gone from about 1000
a day to an artificially limited 5,000 per day (200 per hour)
simply because staff time to process is limited. Registrations
close July 31.
We all understand that the demand for this franchise far exceeds
our ability to satisfy it in this election cycle. An in-depth study
of the whole process is scheduled to begin after this election,
Ronda - perhaps you were unaware of that? The board detailed specific
areas to be considered. Perhaps the most effective way for your
idea to be considered is to arrange for your proposal to be made
available to the ICANN board?
Vint Cerf
At 11:57 AM 7/30/2000 -0400, ronda(_at_)panix(_dot_)com wrote:
>Becky Burr
>NTIA
>U.S. Dept of Commerce
>Washington, D.C.
>
>Dear Becky
>
>Have you tried to register for ICANN's membership? First the membership
>is an ill conceived notion to try to hide that ICANN has been formed
>to deny the public interest with regard to the Internet's names,
>numbers and protocols. It's an effort to make it seem that a non profit
>corporation can be entrusted with the ownership and control of vital
>functions of the infrastructure of the Internet. A nonprofit corporation
>can't be entrusted with this. These are vital social and public
>resources and they can't be put into a private sector entity.
>
>However, rather than the US government making it possible to
>examine the problem of how to protect the vital functions of the
>Internet and to scale them in the public interest, ICANN was empowered
>by the U.S. Department of Commerce with unbridled powers and a limited
>provision was created for so called "membership" of users, i.e. some
>limited right supposedly to vote for certain so called at large directors.
>
>Well, people are now trying to sign up for that membership, for that
>limited right to vote and it is clear that the ICANN folks are
>not even making any access available to that. The version to sign
>up at the ICANN web site requires frames. So people who don't have
>a browser with frames are not able to even use that part of the
>web site. And an alternative web site set up in another country
>gives a message of "We are sorry. The database is currently overloaded.
>Please try again when the system is less busy." when I tried to sign
>up.
>
>Clearly the whole ICANN model is not appropriate for the needs
>of the Internet and its users.
>
>I did propose a different model, and a prototype to build this
>model to you before ICANN was given the U.S. Dept of Commerce
>contract.
>
>Clearly it was crucial that you explore other models and try
>to determine what was the best proposal for the problem the
>U.S. government was faced with, namely how to protect the vital
>functions of the Internet from vested interests and to make
>it possible for them to scale.
>
>It seems that the U.S. government wasn't even interested
>in trying to identify the problem that had to be solved,
>let alone in trying to determine how to solve it.
>
>I am formerly objecting to the whole process of the creation
>and development of ICANN by the U.S. Department of Commerce,
>and requesting that you find a way to have the proposal I
>provided the Department of Commerce implemented.
>
>My proposal provided a means to create meaningful online participation
>by users and for computer scientists supported by their governments
>to create an open process that would utilize the Internet and
>its interactive processes to create the cooperative form needed
>to safeguard the vital functions of the Internet's infrastructure.
>That is what is needed not an institutional entity to encourage
>the "vested interests" to fight over power and control over vital
>functions of the Internet.
>
>I am sending this to you as a formal complaint of not being
>allowed to register with ICANN and asking that you take the necessary
>means to stop the abuse of users and the Internet that ICANN
>represents.
>
>Sincerely
>
>Ronda Hauben
>244 West 72nd Street Apt 15D
>New York, N.Y. 10023
>U.S.A.
>(212)787-9361
>ronda(_at_)ais(_dot_)org
>
=================================================================
I moved to a new MCI WorldCom facility on Nov 11, 1999
MCI WorldCom
22001 Loudoun County Parkway
Building F2, Room 4115, ATTN: Vint Cerf
Ashburn, VA 20147
Telephone (703) 886-1690
FAX (703) 886-0047
"INTERNET IS FOR EVERYONE!"
INET 2001: Internet Global Summit
5-8 June 2001
Sweden International Fairs
Stockholm, Sweden
http://www.isoc.org/inet2001
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello,
New Media Strategies
------------------------------------
http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480
Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World
-------------------------------------------------------
"We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle
between corporate globalization and popular democracy."
http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml
-- David Korten