Fw: [ALSC-Forum] Options A,B,C

[Malcolm Dean]

All these options and visions simply demonstrate that ICANN has not been
derived from first principles, and will therefore necessarily end up being
the beast of politics. Not surprising, since it was invented by political
beasts, but disappointing, since this level of Machiavellianism has little
to do with Postel's vision of the Internet.

What do you think you're doing? Inventing a new form of government like Ben
Franklin? Some voices here are just having too much fun playing Comparative
Political Systems 101.

Start at the beginning, folks. What naming system would make all this
completely unnecessary? How will future distributed database management
technology solve these problems without a League of Nations? What's the
difference between the organizational structures which created the immense
success of the Internet and those which created the morass you are
attempting to deal with here?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Auerbach" <karl@cavebear.com>
To: <forum@atlargestudy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: [ALSC-Forum] Options A,B,C


>
>
> I certainly hope that people do not treat these so-called "options" as
> hard channels into which thinking must flow.
>
> I find these "options" to be more akin to mental straitjackets than useful
> tools of analysis.  I am particularly sad to see that all the "options"
> seem to accept without question the continued existance of "Supporting
> Organizations".
>
> To the extent that ICANN has elements that carve out privileged roles for
> various industry groups - registrars, registries, ISPs, trademark holders,
> etc - then to that extent democratic values are diminished, perhaps to the
> point of vanishing.
>
> --karl--