Re: [ga] Re: A note to Vittorio
At 10:36 09/03/2005, Vittorio Bertola wrote: I think that icannatlarge.com/org was an exceptional experience, but it proved how hard (perhaps impossible) it is to build a purely online organization among people who don't share anything - culture, objectives, ideals, proposals, languages. It wasn't me or any individual that doomed its fate - it was its own nature, and intrinsic lack of cohesion. Dear Vittorio, this is a point where you will understand I will strongly disagree with you, as you may presume. There is certainly some truth in the fact that this hard. But I think we shown that in spite of your torpedoing it to join ALAC this was possible. It only died by the hands of Brother Richard :-) IMHO we shown that we could survive the personal ambitions. We could survive the betrayals. We could survive the insults. We could survive the hi-jacking of our member's list. We could survive the rioters. We could actually survive everything (what is not bad), except the royal steal of our own name. Or may should I say that the whole world can survive everything but an English gentle man. This was I believe an extraordinary experience for all of us (the "soul" as you say is all here) as it demonstrates what I said all along: we are in a namespace and the name is the flag and the issue. This was also a incredible waste of time as if we had reached all our objectives, being incorporated, having an adequate structure. May be should we have run an UDRP against Richard? We still lacked the $ 200. The reason why, I believe is that @large are exactly what you describe. They are not a movement or an opinion. They are a people. The people of the Internet. With hundredth of different needs, opinions, positions, etc. They only want something in common, that it works. And they disagree on the way it should work. Some want to represent them by delegation, by competence, by consensus, etc. They do not care. There is only two things they do not want: to be fooled by ICANN (what does not mean they are against ICANN by nature) and they do not want a king, even benevolent. They gathered on the first and disbanded on the second. I am sure that if Richard released atlarge.org to ATLARGE, we would restart immediately. Would it be good and useful. I do not know for ICANN but I think it would for the members as the next phase is coming in: the SNHNs (small network, home network) representation at ITU, in consumer organization, at WSIS, so why not at ICANN? I say why not ICANN because I am not sure ICANN will be much involved: ICANN is legacy, interested in managing Jon Postel legacy. What we discuss is not legacy: - multinlingual internet - e-regalian services and national surety and trust - handles, ONS, private alias, RFID - universal IPv6 - local Internet Exchanges - reliable services - NGN - e-human rights ICANN will be useful to phase-out Internet SPs while IntelligentSPs will take over. It will be useful to phase out the current TLDs approach without hurting them and the users and the web too much. If we cannot get the atlarge.org which is the only name/flag which identifies ourselves, the atlarge people will probably individually flock to the ITU. But History will remember Richard as the one who killed us all ("I, King Richard, will handle the atlarge.org name to the ones who will have proven to me they truly represent the atlarge"). God forgive you, dear Richard, and bless all the others ! jfc
|