Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1301
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Wednesday, June 26 2002          Volume 01 : Number 1301

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 21:46:28 -0500
From: "Jeff Field" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,

I'm not trying to be funny here; I'm curious.  What is the "intent of the
internet"?

Best regards,

Jeff

- --
jeff field
952-848-7626
952-848-7627 fax
[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
- -----

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of L.
> Gallegos
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 8:54 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,
>
>
> Too little, too late.  The media should have picked up on the ICANN
> problem two years ago at least so that the public would have had a bit
> of information.  Now ICANN will pass whatever the board likes and to
> heck with the public, US Congress and anyone outside the cartel.  In
> the end, it may doom ICANN, but not before the damage is done to
> dessimate the intent of the internet.  Nothing will change until
> the public
> simply ignores ICANN and makes individual choices for themselves.
>
> And people on this list wonder why alternatives are on the rise.
>
> Leah
>
>
> On 25 Jun 2002, at 12:00, Asaad Y. Alnajjar   (Millennium Inc.) wrote:
>
> > Oh well, one more article along the same subject.
> >
> >
> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020625/wr_nm/m
> edia_internet_icann_dc_1
> >
> >
> > Asaad
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At Tuesday, 25 June 2002, William X Walsh <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >
> > >Tuesday, June 25, 2002, 10:12:30 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> > >
> > >> All,
> > >
> > >> Here's the latest from news.com:
> > >
> > >> http://news.com.com/2100-1023-939061.html
> > >
> > >> These are the kinds of articles the public interest needs in the
> > >> mainstream media... my only question:  Why the hell haven't the
> > >> mainstream media people spoken up about ICANN's questionable
> activities
> >
> > >> in the past?
> > >
> > >I really hate ignorant reporting, especially from those reporting on
> > >the tech industry.
> > >
> > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > >EU officials also said they would prefer that the U.S. Department of
> > >Commerce, the government body that spawned ICANN in 1998, relinquish
> > >control of the root-server system, a master control database of
> > >Internet sites that ensures that Web traffic gets to its intended
> > >destination..
> > >
> > >The fear is that in the wrong hands the enormous database could be
> > >mined to determine all comings and goings on the Internet. Although
> > >there is no evidence that this has happened, the issue has attracted
> > >added attention in recent months as law-enforcement officials seek to
> > >shore up defenses against feared acts of cyberterrorism.
> > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > >
> > >The root zone doesn't need to be mined, it is public.  There is no
> > >sane reason to not have it public, and that last paragraph is just
> > >plain ignorance.
> > >
> > >--
> > >Best regards,
> > >William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> > >--
> > >Save Internet Radio!
> > >CARP will kill Webcasting!
> > >http://www.saveinternetradio.org/
> > >
> > >--
> > >This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > >Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > >("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > >Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
>

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:34:48 -0400
From: "L. Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,

The internet is a medium for communication - all kinds, not just the 
www. It is a network of networks and is not centralized, although the few 
dominant commercial powers would like to control the DNS totally and 
exclude individuals and small networks from any meaningful input or 
use.  Domain names are used for a great deal more than the www, but 
the www seems to now be the only factor considered.  

It is most interesting to find that many networks, including governments, 
are moving toward their own systems (roots and networks), which may 
have a negative impact on inclusion.  Some have goine out of their way 
to include all networks and ignore ICANN because of its exclusionary 
tactics.  

ICANN may well succeed in excluding many from the USG DNS root, 
but may also succeed in losing its credibility totally in the long run.  It is 
not a win/win for ICANN, certainly, and ICANN means lose/lose to the 
individual and general internet community - especially if you include the 
academics, developing countries and non-commercial aspects.

Leah

On 25 Jun 2002, at 21:46, Jeff Field wrote:

> I'm not trying to be funny here; I'm curious.  What is the "intent of the
> internet"?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Jeff
> 
> --
> jeff field
> 952-848-7626
> 952-848-7627 fax
> [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
> -----
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of L.
> > Gallegos
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 8:54 PM
> > To: [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,
> >
> >
> > Too little, too late.  The media should have picked up on the ICANN
> > problem two years ago at least so that the public would have had a bit
> > of information.  Now ICANN will pass whatever the board likes and to
> > heck with the public, US Congress and anyone outside the cartel.  In
> > the end, it may doom ICANN, but not before the damage is done to
> > dessimate the intent of the internet.  Nothing will change until
> > the public
> > simply ignores ICANN and makes individual choices for themselves.
> >
> > And people on this list wonder why alternatives are on the rise.
> >
> > Leah
> >
> >
> > On 25 Jun 2002, at 12:00, Asaad Y. Alnajjar   (Millennium Inc.) wrote:
> >
> > > Oh well, one more article along the same subject.
> > >
> > >
> > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020625/wr_nm/m
> > edia_internet_icann_dc_1
> > >
> > >
> > > Asaad
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At Tuesday, 25 June 2002, William X Walsh <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Tuesday, June 25, 2002, 10:12:30 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> All,
> > > >
> > > >> Here's the latest from news.com:
> > > >
> > > >> http://news.com.com/2100-1023-939061.html
> > > >
> > > >> These are the kinds of articles the public interest needs in the
> > > >> mainstream media... my only question:  Why the hell haven't the
> > > >> mainstream media people spoken up about ICANN's questionable
> > activities
> > >
> > > >> in the past?
> > > >
> > > >I really hate ignorant reporting, especially from those reporting on
> > > >the tech industry.
> > > >
> > > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > > >EU officials also said they would prefer that the U.S. Department of
> > > >Commerce, the government body that spawned ICANN in 1998, relinquish
> > > >control of the root-server system, a master control database of
> > > >Internet sites that ensures that Web traffic gets to its intended
> > > >destination..
> > > >
> > > >The fear is that in the wrong hands the enormous database could be
> > > >mined to determine all comings and goings on the Internet. Although
> > > >there is no evidence that this has happened, the issue has attracted
> > > >added attention in recent months as law-enforcement officials seek to
> > > >shore up defenses against feared acts of cyberterrorism.
> > > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > > >
> > > >The root zone doesn't need to be mined, it is public.  There is no
> > > >sane reason to not have it public, and that last paragraph is just
> > > >plain ignorance.
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >Best regards,
> > > >William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> > > >--
> > > >Save Internet Radio!
> > > >CARP will kill Webcasting!
> > > >http://www.saveinternetradio.org/
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > >Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > >("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > >Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 
> 

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 21:07:21 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,

Tuesday, June 25, 2002, 8:34:48 PM, L. Gallegos wrote:

> It is most interesting to find that many networks, including governments, 
> are moving toward their own systems (roots and networks), which may 
> have a negative impact on inclusion.  Some have goine out of their way 
> to include all networks and ignore ICANN because of its exclusionary 
> tactics.  

Back this up please.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --
Save Internet Radio!  
CARP will kill Webcasting!
http://www.saveinternetradio.org/

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:33:13 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,

Leah and all assembly members,

  The ICANN board and staff have already lost a considerable
amount of creditability.  I seems that yet again they are heaping
more of that loss upon themselves in Bucharest as well as
with the "BluePrint" for reform.  It is not such thing.  Rather it
is guise to disinclude participation of stakeholders/users by
the millions.

L. Gallegos wrote:

> The internet is a medium for communication - all kinds, not just the
> www. It is a network of networks and is not centralized, although the few
> dominant commercial powers would like to control the DNS totally and
> exclude individuals and small networks from any meaningful input or
> use.  Domain names are used for a great deal more than the www, but
> the www seems to now be the only factor considered.
>
> It is most interesting to find that many networks, including governments,
> are moving toward their own systems (roots and networks), which may
> have a negative impact on inclusion.  Some have goine out of their way
> to include all networks and ignore ICANN because of its exclusionary
> tactics.
>
> ICANN may well succeed in excluding many from the USG DNS root,
> but may also succeed in losing its credibility totally in the long run.  It is
> not a win/win for ICANN, certainly, and ICANN means lose/lose to the
> individual and general internet community - especially if you include the
> academics, developing countries and non-commercial aspects.
>
> Leah
>
> On 25 Jun 2002, at 21:46, Jeff Field wrote:
>
> > I'm not trying to be funny here; I'm curious.  What is the "intent of the
> > internet"?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > --
> > jeff field
> > 952-848-7626
> > 952-848-7627 fax
> > [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
> > -----
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of L.
> > > Gallegos
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 8:54 PM
> > > To: [email-masked]
> > > Subject: Re: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,
> > >
> > >
> > > Too little, too late.  The media should have picked up on the ICANN
> > > problem two years ago at least so that the public would have had a bit
> > > of information.  Now ICANN will pass whatever the board likes and to
> > > heck with the public, US Congress and anyone outside the cartel.  In
> > > the end, it may doom ICANN, but not before the damage is done to
> > > dessimate the intent of the internet.  Nothing will change until
> > > the public
> > > simply ignores ICANN and makes individual choices for themselves.
> > >
> > > And people on this list wonder why alternatives are on the rise.
> > >
> > > Leah
> > >
> > >
> > > On 25 Jun 2002, at 12:00, Asaad Y. Alnajjar   (Millennium Inc.) wrote:
> > >
> > > > Oh well, one more article along the same subject.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020625/wr_nm/m
> > > edia_internet_icann_dc_1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Asaad
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At Tuesday, 25 June 2002, William X Walsh <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Tuesday, June 25, 2002, 10:12:30 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> All,
> > > > >
> > > > >> Here's the latest from news.com:
> > > > >
> > > > >> http://news.com.com/2100-1023-939061.html
> > > > >
> > > > >> These are the kinds of articles the public interest needs in the
> > > > >> mainstream media... my only question:  Why the hell haven't the
> > > > >> mainstream media people spoken up about ICANN's questionable
> > > activities
> > > >
> > > > >> in the past?
> > > > >
> > > > >I really hate ignorant reporting, especially from those reporting on
> > > > >the tech industry.
> > > > >
> > > > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > > > >EU officials also said they would prefer that the U.S. Department of
> > > > >Commerce, the government body that spawned ICANN in 1998, relinquish
> > > > >control of the root-server system, a master control database of
> > > > >Internet sites that ensures that Web traffic gets to its intended
> > > > >destination..
> > > > >
> > > > >The fear is that in the wrong hands the enormous database could be
> > > > >mined to determine all comings and goings on the Internet. Although
> > > > >there is no evidence that this has happened, the issue has attracted
> > > > >added attention in recent months as law-enforcement officials seek to
> > > > >shore up defenses against feared acts of cyberterrorism.
> > > > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > > > >
> > > > >The root zone doesn't need to be mined, it is public.  There is no
> > > > >sane reason to not have it public, and that last paragraph is just
> > > > >plain ignorance.
> > > > >
> > > > >--
> > > > >Best regards,
> > > > >William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> > > > >--
> > > > >Save Internet Radio!
> > > > >CARP will kill Webcasting!
> > > > >http://www.saveinternetradio.org/
> > > > >
> > > > >--
> > > > >This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > > >Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > > >("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > > >Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > > ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> > > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:47:06 -0500
From: "John Palmer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,

China

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William X Walsh" <[email-masked]>
To: "L. Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,

> 
> Tuesday, June 25, 2002, 8:34:48 PM, L. Gallegos wrote:
> 
> > It is most interesting to find that many networks, including governments, 
> > are moving toward their own systems (roots and networks), which may 
> > have a negative impact on inclusion.  Some have goine out of their way 
> > to include all networks and ignore ICANN because of its exclusionary 
> > tactics.  
> 
> Back this up please.
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> --
> Save Internet Radio!  
> CARP will kill Webcasting!
> http://www.saveinternetradio.org/
> 
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 
> 

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 07:51:51 +0300
From: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: Scribing?

At 25.06.2002 18:07, [email-masked] wrote:
>Alex,  will you again be setting up irc.dal.net, #icann ?

Hi Danny,
unfortunately, there were only few people reading the
live scribing last time. I will take notes and send them
to the list, but won't do live scribing. Glen will take 
notes of the GA meeting. I will ask the Board to send
the real scribes' notes ASAP this time.

Best,
/// Alexander

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 22:00:20 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,

Tuesday, June 25, 2002, 9:47:06 PM, John Palmer wrote:

> China

First off, even if China did this, "many networks, including
governments" does not mean a single government.

Further, the entire China issue has been abused by the alt.root
community to mean something FAR away from what really happened, and
has been blown WAY out of proportion.

This is perfectly exampled in the way that rather than say a single
government, Leah and others say "governments."

Stick to facts and things you can prove, otherwise you are wasting
everyone's time with your alt.root garbage here.

Stick to running your own DNS Networks, and stop thinking that what
happens in your DNS networks has any relevance to the real one.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --
Save Internet Radio!  
CARP will kill Webcasting!
http://www.saveinternetradio.org/

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 03:56:46 -0400
From: "L. Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] At large presentation

Jamie,

If only you could clone yourself a few million times, maybe your voice 
would be a force.  It's a shame that people seem to have given up due to 
the obvious futility of the individual's fight to exist in the ICANN 
framework.

Personally, I was proud of you and would like to thank you for 
attempting to put a voice to the frustrations of most of us in the user 
community.

Leah

On 26 Jun 2002, at 3:38, James Love wrote:

> I'm in the GA, and Denise, Esther, Vittorio, and Izumi Aizu and on the panel 
> to present a report on the at large organizing effort.
> 
> Denise:
> In Accra, the board has called for bottom up at large "structures."   She 
> reports $17k in contributions for at-large.org, and asks for more money. 
> 16 "at large structures" have been created or designated by the effort.  The 
> implication is that all the groups who are listed on the at-large.org web 
> page are on board with this new approach.  There is some talk of creating a 
> "structured role" in policy making, and input into the board decisions. 
> She ends with a slide that says that greater involvement of governments and 
> establishment of 'meaningful' participation by individuals are not 
> necessarily mutually exclusive.   Esther then jumped in to say some people 
> didn't support a greater role by governments.
> 
> Izumi Aizu and Vittorio Bertola appeared on the pane with Esther and Denise, 
> and were generally supportive of the presentation by Esther or Denise.
> 
> Esther made a confident (almost smug) presentation.  She said "I hope you 
> walk away with an appreciation by the huge amount of progress that has been 
> made."  Earlier the at large was an "incoherent" idea, now it is something 
> with .5 million people engaged through the 16 groups, and a structure in 
> place to provide input.  If ICANN becomes government controlled, it will 
> become too powerful.  It is really important that ICANN be controlled by 
> users, by the participants, than by governments.
> 
> I just had my time at the mike from the floor... and went through the 
> basics...   The proposal for "at large structures" eliminates any votes by 
> individuals.  The White Paper gave individuals 8 of 19 board seats.  In 
> Cairo this was reduced to 5.  In Accra, the 5 elected seats were phased out, 
> but there was some hope that there would be an at large SO with maybe 3 
> seats on the board.  Now you have an at large "structure" that at best can 
> place 1 member on a 19 member nominating committee for some board seats, and 
> no one can explain even how that 1 person is selected.  To present this as a 
> success for enhancing the power of individual internet users is absurd.  I 
> said it was not true, as implied by Denise Michel's presentation, that the 
> groups listed as part of the at-large.org effort support the elimination of 
> elections for ICANN board members or the proposals in the blueprint to 
> dismantle democratic mechanisms (http://www.at-large.org/at-large-members.htm).
> 
> Denise said that CPSR was in fact supportive of the new "at large 
> structures" approach, and had joined in submissions on this to the ICANN 
> reform.    I'll let Andy Oram and Hans Klein respond with any helpful 
> clarificatons on this point.
> 
> This was followed by a presentation on the Canadian Internet Registration 
> Authority (CIRA), which recently concluded its elections.   Alexander 
> Svensson then asked a series of good questions, asking about how the elected 
> members addressed issues of mission creep, why participation has declined in 
> elections, and about "outreach" in the elections.  I asked if there was 
> fraud?  And also, how much does it cost to audit the elections?  The CIRA 
> rep said that mission creep had not been a problem, the board had kept 
> things fairly narrow, and that many people seemed satified with the CIRA 
> operation, and were just didn't feel the need to be bother as long as things 
> were working ok.   The last CIRA election had about 1,000 voters.  The CIRA 
> has an external audit function, which ended up questioning about 100 votes, 
> and ended up rejecting about 10.  The cost of the audit and verification 
> proceedure was about $3,000 for the June 2002 election.
> 
> 
> 
> ------
> James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
> http://www.cptech.org, mailto:[email-masked]
> voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040
> 
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 
> 

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 11:00:31 +0200
From: "J-F C. (Jefsey)  Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Taxation without Representation etc.,

- --=======53E915B1=======
Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-72537A9D; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 07:00 26/06/02, William X Walsh said:
>Tuesday, June 25, 2002, 9:47:06 PM, John Palmer wrote:
> > China
>Stick to facts and things you can prove, otherwise you are wasting
>everyone's time with your alt.root garbage here.

Dear WXW,
I am afraid your hate to the "alt.roots" lead you to two mistakes here.

1. in calling them "alt.root" (and I acknowledge that some are calling 
themselves this way) you prevent yourself from an analysis of the true 
nature of the network, of the DNS architecture and of the ways we shoukd 
use it today. I do not think that sectarian point of view may ever lead to 
a peaceful, opened, stable, secure, consensual approach - even if they 
happened to be true.

2. the real example is not that much China. The real example is USA. Please 
understand that you are an US user and always used the Internet. I am an 
European user, we created the Intlnet and we delegated the Internet its 
namespace. I accept it is a different perspective.

I am impressed by two things :

- - up to now - except the 7 new TLDs they seemingly partly regret - that 
delegation (documented in Oct 1984 by Jon Postel in the RFC 920) has been 
stable to the point that our understanding has not known a single change 
over 18 years and you obviously stringly want to keep the ARPA namespace 
strictly the way we delegated it.

- - it is now used by the entire world, yet it has not adapted. TCP/IP is 
unchanged. IPv4 is still 255 blocks. The arpa domain has still 255 (+7) 
TLDs. The DNS is still used to control the use of the network and to fund 
it, rather than to support it, along with the Whois university related 
fields. In that sense the USG's arpa part of the International datanetwork 
system is an outdated, confuse, unstable, insecure and over crowded system. 
Like an old third world railway packed with people.

I think there are urgent patches, just to make that old system survive. For 
example, to survive KPNQuest, Al-Queida, ICANN ...This is not disruptive, 
this is urgent.

Please recall I was joked at on Sept 8th when I asked, in my Montevideo BoD 
candidacy speech, that  the US ten (East Coast six) root server systems be 
internationally disseminated.

I now ask for the root system to be co-European/Asian mirrored and 
privately co-operated under public and legal control with mutual real-time 
consistency checking, the Verisign ATLAS and their multinational plug-in to 
be under GPL, the protocol, root and RIR registrations to be performed by a 
joint ITU/ICANN secretariat.

jfc

- --=======53E915B1=======--

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 05:14:52 -0400
From: James Love <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] GA discussion on at large

I'm in the GA, and Denise, Esther, Vittorio, and Izumi Aizu and on the panel 
to present a report on the at large organizing effort.

Denise:
In Accra, the board has called for bottom up at large "structures."   She 
reports $17k in contributions for at-large.org, and asks for more money. 16 
"at large structures" have been created or designated by the effort.  The 
implication is that all the groups who are listed on the at-large.org web 
page are on board with this new approach.  There is some talk of creating a 
"structured role" in policy making, and input into the board decisions. She 
ends with a slide that says that greater involvement of governments and 
establishment of 'meaningful' participation by individuals are not 
necessarily mutually exclusive.   Esther then jumped in to say some people 
didn't support a greater role by governments.

Izumi Aizu and Vittorio Bertola appeared on the pane with Esther and Denise, 
and were generally supportive of the presentation by Esther or Denise.

Esther made a confident (almost smug) presentation.  She said "I hope you 
walk away with an appreciation by the huge amount of progress that has been 
made."  Earlier the at large was an "incoherent" idea, now it is something 
with .5 million people engaged through the 16 groups, and a structure in 
place to provide input.  If ICANN becomes government controlled, it will 
become too powerful.  It is really important that ICANN be controlled by 
users, by the participants, than by governments.

I just had my time at the mike from the floor... and went through the 
basics...   The proposal for "at large structures" eliminates any votes by 
individuals.  The White Paper gave individuals 8 of 19 board seats.  In 
Cairo this was reduced to 5.  In Accra, the 5 elected seats were phased out, 
but there was some hope that there would be an at large SO with maybe 3 
seats on the board.  Now you have an at large "structure" that at best can 
place 1 member on a 19 member nominating committee for some board seats, and 
no one can explain even how that 1 person is selected.  To present this as a 
success for enhancing the power of individual internet users is absurd.  I 
said it was not true, as implied by Denise Michel's presentation, that the 
groups listed as part of the at-large.org effort support the elimination of 
elections for ICANN board members or the proposals in the blueprint to 
dismantle democratic mechanisms (http://www.at-large.org/at-large-members.htm).

Denise said that CPSR was in fact supportive of the new "at large 
structures" approach, and had joined in submissions on this to the ICANN 
reform.    I'll let Andy Oram and Hans Klein respond with any helpful 
clarificatons on this point.

This was followed by a presentation on the Canadian Internet Registration 
Authority (CIRA), which recently concluded its elections.   Alexander 
Svensson then asked a series of good questions, asking about how the elected 
members addressed issues of mission creep, why participation has declined in 
elections, and about "outreach" in the elections.  I asked if there was 
fraud?  And also, how much does it cost to audit the elections?  The CIRA 
rep said that mission creep had not been a problem, the board had kept 
things fairly narrow, and that many people seemed satified with the CIRA 
operation, and were just didn't feel the need to be bother as long as things 
were working ok.   The last CIRA election had about 1,000 voters.  The CIRA 
has an external audit function, which ended up questioning about 100 votes, 
and ended up rejecting about 10.  The cost of the audit and verification 
proceedure was about $3,000 for the June 2002 election.

- ------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:[email-masked]
voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

- -- 
- ------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:[email-masked]
voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 05:15:34 -0400
From: James Love <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] GA on Blueprint changes for GA

Well, the GA just concluded the discussion the blueprint proposals to 
eliminate elections for the GA chair to to prevent the GA from having votes 
on anything.   Alexander Svensson asked for discussion.  I was the *only* 
person to speak on this issue, and indeed, all morning I believe there has 
only between two or three other persons making any comments from the floor 
on anything.  This has been the quietest GA meeting I have ever seen.  No 
one else from the NCC or the at large spoke from the floor.

My point was that ICANN was seeking to eliminate every opportunity for 
ordinary people to register disagreement with the ICANN board positions. The 
elimination of at large elections was also part of this.

With respect to the GA votes on the two motions asking for a rebid (the 
blunt and more "diplomatic" version), Alexander did not mention either 
motion in his presentation, even though he had opposed having the votes 
earlier, on the grounds that it would lead to the elimination of the GA. 
[Interesting note: apparently Paul Twomey did not allow the GAC to discuss 
the GA vote during the GAC meeting, it has become an official non-event) Now 
we are in  a situation where the GA will be changed in such a way that the 
public will not be able to choose its leader, there will be no unmoderated 
discussions, and no votes on anything.

In my opinion, the value of the GA being able to elect its own leaders and 
to register its own independent views is to provide evidence that the ICANN 
board is out of step with the Internet community (when this happens), and to 
prevent the ICANN board from claiming a global consensus, when they don't 
have one.  It's a saftey value and a modest system for accountability, which 
apparently is why is being eliminated.

Jamie

- ------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:[email-masked]
voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

- -- 
- ------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:[email-masked]
voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1301
*************************