Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #225
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Thursday, February 8 2001          Volume 01 : Number 225

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

Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 22:17:16 -0800
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Old proposal

On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 08:51:46PM -0500, Dennis Schaefer wrote:
> Hi Marilyn --
> 
> Sorry about the misdirect.  I was sure I had hit to Reply to
> All. <G>
> 
> I can't disagree with you about the infrastructure consisting of privately
> owned facilities.  But the ether that holds that structure together is
> the public forum called the Internet -- which was built with taxpayer
> money. 

You are mistaken.  There is no such ether; the internet wasn't built
with taxpayer money.   The original research was done with taxpayer 
money, but that was quite some time ago.  

> So selling that public forum to private interests

You are deceived.  It looks like a public forum, but it is really a 
large number of privately owned forums.

> not beholden to
> constitutional matters of
> due process and free speech

I presume by "constitution" you mean the US constitution? The US
constitution only applies to government actions in the US.  It does not
apply to the Internet.  There is no guarantee of due process or free
speech on the Internet, none whatsoever.  You get free speech if your
ISP doesn't block you.  If you are a spammer, for example, your ISP may
very well shut down your free speech.  Your ISP can regulate your
content, or whatever else he wants to do.  The reason there is lots of
freedom on the Internet is because there is a market for freedom.  It
has nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution. 

And jeez, do people think they could edit their messages before they 
reply.  This cascade of footers is ridiculous:

> > > --
> > > 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
> > > --
> > > 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
> > >

- -- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
[email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
- --
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, 6 Feb 2001 23:53:03 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Reform in the GA?

Hello Kent,

Tuesday, February 06, 2001, 10:09:15 PM, Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 05:12:20PM -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:
>> Hello.
>> 
>> I am writing as a member of this GA, and as a member of an
>> organization whose leader is now claiming that one thing that
>> organization has accomplished is a "turning of the GA of the DNSO
>> around."

> I remember a day not long past when Joe Baptista was making up obscene 
> limricks and posting them to the list.  Relative to that, the GA has 
> indeed been "turned around".

I doubt Joop Teernstra (who opposed the rules that eliminated the
Baptista problem) was taking credit for that.

>> I find it odd that anyone who is a member of this assembly can think
>> that this assembly has been turned around in a positive fashion, when
>> in fact this GA assembly has not been able to accomplish anything as a
>> cohesive body.

> That is not its function.  It was explicitly never intended to be a 
> decision making body.  There are some who think that is what it should 
> be, but that is not what it is.

It was that kind of reform that was implied had occurred, and was a
result of positive influence from the IDNO.

>> It can't even initiate elections to replace a GA Chair
>> whose office long ago expired.  It has been unable to even agree on a
>> set of principles to put forward for giving itself a real role in the
>> organization.

> It has a role; it's just not the role you want it to have.

What is that role, Kent?    I agree it doesn't have the role I think
it should have, I also don't think it currently serves in any serious
role at all, except window dressing for the illusion of "bottom up"
consensus.

That said, what, if any, reform do you credit the IDNO for bringing
about the GA?  That's what I'm trying to nail down here, I don't see
any reform at all, except for the elimination of a member who was
being obnoxiously obscene, and that was opposed by the IDNO's founder.

- -- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[email-masked]

- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 19:42:10 +1100
From: "Dassa" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Reform in the GA?

|>-----Original Message-----
|>From: [email-masked] 
|>[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
|>Eric Dierker
|>Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:52 PM
|>To: William X. Walsh
|>Cc: [email-masked]
|>Subject: Re: [ga] Reform in the GA?
|>
|>IF YOU RECEIVED AND REVIEWED THIS POST PLEASE EMAIL BACK A SINGLE POST
|>INDICATING;  YES

I review all the posts submitted to the GA, much to my disappointment the majority of the time.  I see a small number of participants attempting to build something but very little effective growth.

It appears to me that a lot of the structures associated with the DNS, ICANN debates and structure are being purposely directed towards ineffectiveness and self destruction.  IMHO, it is starting to look like the only effective means to become involved is to work outside of the ICANN structures in lobby groups that may develop some serious political clout.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 01:42:16 -0800 
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Reform in the GA?

> It appears to me that a lot of the structures associated with 
> the DNS, ICANN debates and structure are being purposely 
> directed towards ineffectiveness and self destruction.  IMHO, 
> it is starting to look like the only effective means to 
> become involved is to work outside of the ICANN structures in 
> lobby groups that may develop some serious political clout.

This is becoming a more attractive thought, as time goes on.
- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 03:50:27 -0600
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Reform in the GA?

>> It appears to me that a lot of the structures associated with
>> the DNS, ICANN debates and structure are being purposely
>> directed towards ineffectiveness and self destruction.  IMHO,
>> it is starting to look like the only effective means to
>> become involved is to work outside of the ICANN structures in
>> lobby groups that may develop some serious political clout.
>
>This is becoming a more attractive thought, as time goes on.

Damn straight!

(An obligatory ME TOO! post from the pen of...

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.domain-owners.org http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 02:21:23 -0800 
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] FW: [wg-review] Effectiveness?

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C090EF.B8E41980
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

[I had accidently posted this to WG-Review]

- -----Original Message-----
From: Roeland Meyer [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 12:23 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [wg-review] Effectiveness?

The last time we had an election, for GA chair, it was only allowed by the
interim NC. They rubber-stamped the selection. This was because a resounding
sea of voices was loud enough to make them listen. At that time there were
many, whom are now associated with constituencies, that were very vocal in
the process. Those voices, now ensconced in their constituencies, don't seem
to care so much for the GA anymore. <sigh> This is indeed a shame. Divide
and conquer seems to still be a sound strategem, even among the intellectual
elite.

- --
ROELAND M.J. MEYER
Managing Director
Morgan Hill Software Company, Inc.
TEL: +001 925 373 3954
FAX: +001 925 373 9781
http://www.mhsc.com <http://www.mhsc.com/> 
mailto: [email-masked]

 

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C090EF.B8E41980
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">

<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=653461308-07022001><SPAN 
class=721531810-07022001>[I had accidently posted this to 
WG-Review]</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr 
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma 
  size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Roeland Meyer 
  [mailto:[email-masked]]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, February 07, 2001 12:23 
  AM<BR><B>To:</B> [email-masked]<BR><B>Subject:</B> [wg-review] 
  Effectiveness?<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=653461308-07022001>The last time we 
  had an election, for GA chair, it was only allowed by the interim NC. They 
  rubber-stamped the selection. This was because a resounding sea of voices was 
  loud enough to make them listen.&nbsp;At that time there were many, whom are 
  now associated with constituencies, that were very vocal in the process. Those 
  voices, now ensconced in their constituencies, don't seem to care so much for 
  the GA anymore. &lt;sigh&gt; This is indeed a shame. Divide and conquer seems 
  to still be a sound strategem, even among the intellectual 
  elite.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN 
  class=653461308-07022001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN 
  class=653461308-07022001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <P><FONT size=2>--<BR>ROELAND M.J. MEYER<BR>Managing Director<BR>Morgan Hill 
  Software Company, Inc.<BR>TEL: +001 925 373 3954<BR>FAX: +001 925 373 
  9781<BR><A target=_blank 
  href="http://www.mhsc.com/">http://www.mhsc.com</A><BR>mailto: 
  [email-masked]<BR></FONT></P>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C090EF.B8E41980--
- --
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: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:46:11 +1300
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Reform in the GA?

At 23:53 6/02/01 -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:

>
>I doubt Joop Teernstra (who opposed the rules that eliminated the
>Baptista problem) was taking credit for that.
>

Mr Walsh in his zeal for carrying his vendetta anew to this list, has some
problem with the truth here.
I never opposed the list rules. I suggested an improvement.

What I said was this:

quote********
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 11:41:42 +1300
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Proposal for mailing list policy
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: [email-masked]
Precedence: bulk
X-Envelope-To: [email-masked]
X-UIDL: 935ae6084c048926de6567eb81599640

Harald,

There is a danger in having rules (especially filtering rules) that are be
implemented only at the discretion of the Chair or the Sergeants at Arms.

Therefore a suggestion for a minor improvement:

Challenged identities, insults and slander.

In order to make sure that the SaA will actually act to protect the list
from these, there should be a provision such as:

"complaints about list-behaviour or challenges about a poster's identity
are directed to the Chair , who must instruct the SaA to take appropriate
action".

(What that action is, can then be seen from following the ga-unfiltered
list. It is clear that there should also be ways to sanction a Chair who
would allow filtering rules to be applied in a biased manner)

- --Joop Teernstra LL.M.--  , bootstrap  of
the Cyberspace Association,
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
unquote**********

Also FYI,  Mr Walsh started this thread with the out of context reference
to my posting on the IDNO list that refers not to GA reform, but to the
fact that the GA has gradually come around to accept the need for an IDNO
constituency.

Just to set the record straight.

- -Joop-

- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 05:41:59 -0800 
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [ga] Reform in the GA?

You know, this little squabble has already torn down one list, maybe two,
and it has taken a good-sized chunk of this one, to the point that BOTH
co-chairs spoke up against it, just last month. Please, don't reply to the
cross-poster.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joop Teernstra [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:46 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Reform in the GA?
> 
> 
> At 23:53 6/02/01 -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:
> 
> >
> >I doubt Joop Teernstra (who opposed the rules that eliminated the
> >Baptista problem) was taking credit for that.
> >
> 
> Mr Walsh in his zeal for carrying his vendetta anew to this 
> list, has some
> problem with the truth here.
> I never opposed the list rules. I suggested an improvement.
> 
> What I said was this:
> 
> quote********
> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 11:41:42 +1300
> To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
> From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Re: [ga] Proposal for mailing list policy
> In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Sender: [email-masked]
> Precedence: bulk
> X-Envelope-To: [email-masked]
> X-UIDL: 935ae6084c048926de6567eb81599640
> 
> Harald,
> 
> There is a danger in having rules (especially filtering 
> rules) that are be
> implemented only at the discretion of the Chair or the 
> Sergeants at Arms.
> 
> Therefore a suggestion for a minor improvement:
> 
> Challenged identities, insults and slander.
> 
> In order to make sure that the SaA will actually act to 
> protect the list
> from these, there should be a provision such as:
> 
> "complaints about list-behaviour or challenges about a 
> poster's identity
> are directed to the Chair , who must instruct the SaA to take 
> appropriate
> action".
> 
> (What that action is, can then be seen from following the 
> ga-unfiltered
> list. It is clear that there should also be ways to sanction 
> a Chair who
> would allow filtering rules to be applied in a biased manner)
> 
> 
> 
> --Joop Teernstra LL.M.--  , bootstrap  of
> the Cyberspace Association,
> the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
> unquote**********
> 
> Also FYI,  Mr Walsh started this thread with the out of 
> context reference
> to my posting on the IDNO list that refers not to GA reform, 
> but to the
> fact that the GA has gradually come around to accept the need 
> for an IDNO
> constituency.
> 
> Just to set the record straight.
> 
> -Joop-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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, 07 Feb 2001 10:01:36 -0500
From: "Kevin J. Connolly" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Reform in the GA?

Yes, I've received & reviewed it.

Kevin J. Connolly
Attorney and Counselor at Law
Robinson Silverman Pearce Aronsohn & Berman, LLP
1290 Sixth Aveue of the Americas
New York, NY 10104
212-541-1066/fax 212-541-1346
This note is not legal advice. If it were legal advice, it would come with an invoice.

Live, like there's no tomorrow.....
     Love, like you've never been hurt.....
          And dance, like no one's watching.

*******************************************************************************
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential
and is or may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work
product doctrine, joint defense privileges, trade secret protections,
and/or other applicable protections from disclosure.  If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this com-
munication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communi-
cation in error, please immediately notify us by calling our Help Desk
at 212-541-2000 ext.3314, or by e-mail to [email-masked]
*******************************************************************************
- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 21:48:53 +0100 (MET)
From: DNSO Secretariat <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] NC telecon, 8 Feb 2001 (5:00 LA, 9:00 New York, 14:00 Paris) **PHONE**

REMINDER and PHONE information.

[ To: [email-masked] ]
[ To: [email-masked], [email-masked] ]

The next NC teleconference will be held on 8 February 2001, 13:00 UTC
(at 5:00 LA, 8:00 US East Coast, 14:00 CET, 22:00 Japan/Korea, 24:00 Melbourne)

The NC agenda has been published on the DNSO Web site on 29 Jan 2001, 
cf. http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010208.NCtelecon-agenda.html
Please refer to that URL for related documents.

The NSI is kindly providing the bridge.

AUDIO ACCESS INFORMATION:
 ==========================
 CALL DATE:         FEB-08-2001  (Thursday)
 CALL TIME:         08:00 AM EASTERN TIME
 USA Toll Number:   +1-712-257-0433

 PASSCODE: 58282
 LEADER:            Mr Roger Cochetti

 SPECIAL NOTES:
 =================
     CALL NOTES: THERE WILL BE 10 LINES ON LISTEN ONLY

DNSO Secretariat
- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 12:07:46 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[3]: [ga] Reform in the GA?

Hello Joop,

Wednesday, February 07, 2001, 3:46:11 AM, Joop Teernstra wrote:

> At 23:53 6/02/01 -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:

>>
>>I doubt Joop Teernstra (who opposed the rules that eliminated the
>>Baptista problem) was taking credit for that.
>>

> Mr Walsh in his zeal for carrying his vendetta anew to this list, has some
> problem with the truth here.
> I never opposed the list rules. I suggested an improvement.

Yes, and when those improvements were not supported, you opposed the
adoption of the rules in favor the extremist rules that you pushed
into the IDNO, and supported the actions of those who left the GA in
protest over what was simply rules of simply civil discourse (which
have been effective in solving the problems that were facing the GA at
that time).

- -- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[email-masked]

- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 12:05:14 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[4]: [ga] Reform in the GA?

Hello Roeland,

Wednesday, February 07, 2001, 5:41:59 AM, Roeland Meyer wrote:

> You know, this little squabble has already torn down one list, maybe two,
> and it has taken a good-sized chunk of this one, to the point that BOTH
> co-chairs spoke up against it, just last month. Please, don't reply to the
> cross-poster.

More lies, Roeland.   There was no cross posting here.

- -- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[email-masked]

- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 14:50:09 -0800
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Reform in the GA?

On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 07:42:10PM +1100, Dassa wrote:
> It appears to me that a lot of the structures associated with the DNS,
> ICANN debates and structure are being purposely directed towards
> ineffectiveness and self destruction.

A standard conspiracy theory.  

>  IMHO, it is starting to look like
> the only effective means to become involved is to work outside of the
> ICANN structures in lobby groups that may develop some serious political
> clout. 

If you are seeking political clout, that is indeed an appropriate
mechanism.  If your goal is political clout, please leave immediately.

- -- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
[email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 14:54:42 -0800
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Reform in the GA?

On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 11:53:03PM -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:
> Hello Kent,

Hello William,

> That said, what, if any, reform do you credit the IDNO for bringing
> about the GA? 

None whatsoever -- I'm sorry, I reacted to a comment out of context.

> That's what I'm trying to nail down here, I don't see
> any reform at all, except for the elimination of a member who was
> being obnoxiously obscene,

Well, the list rules are a bit more general than that.

- -- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
[email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
- --
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, 7 Feb 2001 17:09:33 -0600
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Reform in the GA?

At 2:50 pm -0800 2/7/01, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 07:42:10PM +1100, Dassa wrote:
>> It appears to me that a lot of the structures associated with the DNS,
>> ICANN debates and structure are being purposely directed towards
>> ineffectiveness and self destruction.
>
>A standard conspiracy theory.

A standard response from one of the architects of a fraudulent process,
when people start becoming aware of the truth.

>>  IMHO, it is starting to look like
>> the only effective means to become involved is to work outside of the
>> ICANN structures in lobby groups that may develop some serious political
>> clout.
>
>If you are seeking political clout, that is indeed an appropriate
>mechanism.  If your goal is political clout, please leave immediately.

Are you trying to say there is no politics within the ICANN process?

Tee hee. The one thing ICANN has proved to be best at is advancing
political careers - Dyson, Roberts, Crispy-Crockett, Simms, Abril, Stubbs,
Cerf...

The list is long and indistinguished.

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.domain-owners.org http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
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: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:23:17 -0500
From: Rob Courtney <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] International Study Team Issues Letter to ICANN Study

Members of the General Assembly:

Earlier today, known as the NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS) 
issued a letter to ICANN's new Study Committee requesting access to 
important data from last year's  election of At-Large Directors to 
the ICANN Board. The NAIS team includes representatives from 
non-profit and academic organizations worldwide, and is currently 
preparing an in-depth study of public representation in ICANN.

CDT and its partner Common Cause serve as North American members of 
NAIS; the entire NAIS team consists of:

  - Izumi Aizu, Principle, Asia Network Research
  - Jerry Berman, Executive Director; Alan Davidson, Associate 
Director; and Rob Courtney, Policy Analyst; Center for Democracy and 
Technology, USA
  - Adam Peake, Senior Research Fellow, Center for Global 
Communications (GLOCOM), International University of Japan.
  - Christian Ahlert, Center for Interactive Media, University of 
Giessen, Germany
  - Scott Harshbarger, President; Don Simon, General Counsel; and Andy 
Draheim, Senior Policy Analyst; Common Cause, USA
  - Raúl Echeberría, Instituto Nacional de Investigatión Agropecuaria, Uruguay
  - Clement Dzidonu, President and CEO, International Institute for 
Information Technology (INIIT), Ghana
  - Stefaan Verhulst, Director, Programme in Comparative Media Law and 
Policy, Oxford University, UK
  - Myungkoo Kang, Department of Communication, Seoul National 
University, Seoul, South Korea
  - Jeanette Hofmann, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin/NEXUS, Germany

I am attaching a copy of our letter to ICANN Study Committee Chair 
Carl Bildt, transmitted to him on February 7, 2001. A copy of the 
letter is also available at:
http://www.cdt.org/dns/icann/nais/010207bildt.shtml

An overview of the NAIS team and its study project is available at:
http://www.cdt.org/dns/icann/nais/010207overview.shtml

Please feel free to contact me if you have any inquiries or thoughts 
regarding either of these documents, or the NAIS effort itself.

Rob Courtney
Policy Analyst
Center for Democracy & Technology

* * *

February 7, 2001

Mr. Carl Bildt
Chair
At-Large Membership Study Committee
Internet Corporation for Assigned
   Names and Numbers
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey, CA 90292

Dear Mr. Bildt:

Congratulations on being selected to lead the At-Large Membership 
Study Committee of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and 
Numbers (ICANN):  a challenging task as ICANN's activities can have a 
substantial impact on the development and growth of the Internet 
community. The At-Large Membership Study Committee's vital function 
will be to review that impact in light of the public representation 
currently offered in ICANN and to propose new directions for 2001.

In furtherance of the Study Committee's work, we offer several 
suggestions for your consideration as the Committee begins its task.

When the ICANN Board created the At-Large Membership Study Committee, 
it anticipated that the findings and recommendations of independent 
study groups working outside of ICANN's formal process would 
substantially inform the Committee's work.  The undersigned 
individuals and organizations constitute one such study team.

The "NGO and Academic ICANN Study," or NAIS, is an international 
group of scholars and representatives of the public interest 
community, all of whom have been involved in ICANN and Internet 
issues on an ongoing basis. A description of the group and a list of 
its participants are attached to this letter.

NAIS will undertake a comprehensive study of the recent ICANN 
election, the concept of the At-Large membership, and the nature of 
public representation for the ICANN Board of Directors as a whole.

We look forward to working with the ICANN Study Committee, and hope 
that the Committee will find our work useful as it considers its own 
recommendations.

Among other initiatives, NAIS is planning to sponsor a public forum 
on issues related to the study in conjunction with the upcoming 
Melbourne meeting. We hope to organize a number of presentations as a 
means of beginning an open dialogue with the ICANN community on the 
successes and failures of the recent election, and the options for 
the future. We would very much like to work with the Study Committee 
in planning this session to ensure that it is successful and 
productive.

As you know, one hallmark of any good research project is access to 
the best possible data. In the case of the At-Large study, much of 
the information about what happened, and why, resides in the 
expertise of the individuals who planned and implemented last year's 
election. But a great deal of equally important data resides in the 
internal records of ICANN and of its election administrator, 
election.com.

We hope that ICANN and its Study Committee will make all of this 
election data available not only to the undersigned researchers, but 
to other research efforts as well. The ICANN Board decided that this 
study process should be conducted by self-organizing groups of the 
ICANN community. Such studies can be valid only if there is 
relatively unfettered access to all relevant data. Without such 
access, serious research will not be possible, and the validity and 
legitimacy of the outside studies will be compromised. These studies 
will then be of less use to the Study Committee, and the whole point 
of the Board's decision to rely on such outside efforts will be 
defeated.

In other words, we suggest that a primary purpose of the Study 
Committee may be to facilitate the efforts by outside, 
self-organizing study groups such as ourselves to gain access to all 
relevant data. As such, the Study Committee might work to ensure the 
cooperation of ICANN in providing access to data, documents and key 
personnel to outside study groups. In addition, there is substantial 
work to be done to ensure that personally-identifiable information is 
removed from the released data, so as to preserve ICANN's commitment 
to protecting the privacy of voters.

We attach to this letter a list of the categories of data and 
documents to which we request access as an initial matter. We would 
be pleased to cooperate with you, and with ICANN's staff, to ensure 
that access granted us would cause a minimal disruption to the Study 
Committee's important work. To the extent possible, we additionally 
suggest that you consider making this data available by posting it on 
the Internet, or providing controlled access via the Internet to all 
self-organized study groups.

By providing this access, the Study Committee and ICANN can 
demonstrate their commitment to complete and valid outside study 
efforts, and encourage a better understanding of the successes, 
shortcomings, and unanswered questions in last year's election.

The time allotted for reviewing the election is short, and the speedy 
release of this data would enable the work of our study team, as well 
as others, to get underway. We are anxious to do so. We look forward 
to cooperating with you and your Committee on this important project, 
and wish you good luck in this important effort you have undertaken.

Sincerely,

The NGO and Academic ICANN Study  (NAIS)
(Organizational affiliations are provided below for identification 
purposes only)

Izumi Aizu, Principle, Asia Network Research

Jerry Berman, Executive Director; Alan Davidson, Associate Director; 
and Rob Courtney, Policy Analyst; Center for Democracy and 
Technology, USA

Adam Peake, Senior Research Fellow, Center for Global Communications 
(GLOCOM), International University of Japan.

Christian Ahlert, Center for Interactive Media, University of Giessen, Germany

Scott Harshbarger, President; Don Simon, General Counsel; and Andy 
Draheim, Senior Policy Analyst; Common Cause, USA

Raúl Echeberría, Instituto Nacional de Investigatión Agropecuaria, Uruguay

Clement Dzidonu, President and CEO, International Institute for 
Information Technology (INIIT), Ghana

Stefaan Verhulst, Director, Programme in Comparative Media Law and 
Policy, Oxford University, UK

Myungkoo Kang, Department of Communication, Seoul National 
University, Seoul, South Korea

Jeanette Hofmann, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin/NEXUS, Germany

cc: Charles Costello
     Pindar Wong
     Denise Michel
     Vinton Cerf
     Michael Roberts
     Andrew McLaughlin
     Louis Touton, Esq.

Enclosures:
   Initial List of Data & Documents

Initial List of Data & Documents
- --------------------------------
* Server logs. The logs of the systems that ICANN and election.com 
used for voter education, registration, activation, and voting 
programs contain important information about user access patterns at 
various stages of the elections. They will provide clues about system 
load and about voter facility with the systems. They may also provide 
some limited data on the potential for capture, by indicating whether 
substantial numbers of registrations came from one entity or 
organization. Personally-identifiable information should be stripped 
from this data before its distribution to the public, in order to 
preserve ICANN's guarantee of privacy for voters.

* Registration records. Public release of at least some information 
collected from users by ICANN's registration and activation servers 
would greatly facilitate any election study. Since user participation 
in each stage of the membership process- registration, activation, 
and voting-dropped off substantially in all regions, these records 
should be reviewed. In the interests of privacy, 
personally-identifiable information such as e-mail addresses or 
mailing addresses should be masked where they appear, but other 
identifiers that cannot be reliably tied to real-world identities 
should be left intact.

* Mailing records. Failure to receive PIN numbers has been a major 
grievance by voters and would-be voters in the election. Review of 
ICANN's system for mailing these numbers, as well as other 
election-related correspondence (paper and electronic) will help to 
understand how such problems could be avoided in the future.

* Voting records. Indications of voter participation, as well as 
independent scrutiny of the vote count, are important parts of any 
election review. Once again, personally-identifiable information 
should be masked to protect the secrecy of the ballot.

* Technical specifications. Both ICANN and election.com experienced 
technical difficulties at key moments in the registration and 
election processes. Their systems should be reviewed, and the reasons 
behind those difficulties understood.

* Financial records. Orchestration of a worldwide election is no 
small undertaking, and the cost of an election is of major importance 
when considering future efforts to select Directors. ICANN should 
publish detailed records of costs and funding sources for the 
election.

* Communications. The internal and external communication of ICANN 
officers and staff regarding the election will offer important 
insights into the way that major decisions were made. The public 
record should include the communications of the Election and 
Nominating Committees.

- --

Rob Courtney
Policy Analyst
Center for Democracy & Technology
1634 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20006
202 637 9800
fax 202 637 0968
[email-masked]
http://www.cdt.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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #225
************************