Re: [ALSC-Forum] Fwd: role of At-Large - At-large Organizing Committee

[Jeff Williams]

Jamie and all stakeholders or interested parties,

James Love wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Esther Dyson" <edyson@edventure.com>
> > >Hence the big discussions about ICANN's supposed  "mission creep." As
> long
> > >as ICANN keeps to its by-consensus, by-contract architecture, that
> mission
> > >creep is almost impossible.  But the moment it became part of, say,
> the
> > >ITU (or remained with the USG), it *would* have such authority/powers
> and
> > >would inevitably be drawn into conflicts it should avoid.
> > >
> > >Those conflicts won't go away, and perhaps those issues do belong
> with the
> > >ITU.  But ICANN's current formulation will help it to stay clear of
> them.
>
> Esther, the ITU has just proposed the following exercise:
>
> "4. Working with ICANN to define an internationally agreed restatement
> and
>    description of the boundaries for ICANN's policy-making
>    activities, if any, while respecting the sovereign rights of
> governments.
>    For example, consideration could be given to developing an ITU-T
>    Recommendation with this goal."

  INteresting proposal from the ITU-T.  However after reading it
in it's entirety there seems to be quite a bit either missing or
unknown.  That being will such a "Discussion" be an online
forum of some sort to help Restate "description of the boundaries
for ICANN's policy-making    activities, if any, while respecting
the sovereign rights of governments." ?

>
>
> Right now there are no meaningful legal boundaries for ICANN's
> activities.   The Articles of Incorporation are not only very broad, but
> they can be easily modified by the board.   The board so far has never
> really come up with a useful boundary statement.

  Very good point here Jamie.  And one that has been hashed over,
discussed, and debated on a number of occasions as you know...

>  This is not a
> complaint about actual mission creep.   This is about setting some type
> of policy in place for the future, to constrain future boards.   The ITU
> has now stepped up to the plate on this.   It seems to me that this
> might be a useful thing to do.

  I agree as well that this would be a very useful exercise to do at this
juncture if and only if such an exercise is done online (Discussion forum),
and open to any and all that wish to participate...  Otherwise such an
exercise will be tainted and disregarded by in large, amongst being
considered illegitimate...

>
>
> On a separate but related topic, we (the NGO E-Commerce Roundtable) met
> yesterday with DOC, to discuss ICANN.   Some of us encouraged DOC to
> consider a re-bid on its ICANN contracts, to allow for competition.

  Yes we also some time ago suggested this very thing to DOC.
I am glad to see that although late, other organizations involved
have stepped up to this admittedly embarrassing proposed
need.  But better late than never...

>
> There is an issue of whether or not there are consequences when
> non-profits fail to deliver as promised.   On the "reform" front,
> several of us pushed for a decentralization of the DNSO functions,
> perhaps through regional DNSO bodies, simliar to what one sees in the
> numbering area.   Some believe that 90 percent of ICANN's problems
> relate to the DNSO, and that few of the DNSO policies need to be made at
> a global level.

  Agreed that the DNSO related issues need to be made at the global
level.  Such issues must also be determined by vote of any and
all of the stakeholders/users.  However the present, as with the
past BOD members have harbored the belief that such is not
possible.  That of course is bunkum, but none the less this
has been the catalyst of what is causing most of ICANN's
problems.  That to me anyway is a lack or good or responsible
leadership.  That's a BIG problem!

>
>
> Jamie

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208