Re: [ga] A Monroe Doctrine for the Internet

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Rick,

When it comes to matters affecting the Internet, the
community of participants has long agreed to abide by
the principle of consensus-based decision-making.

In "Why Consensus Matters" by Susan Crawford and David
Johnson, the following definition of consensus is put
forth:

"The test for consensus is instinctively known by all
of us (and is set forth in ICANN's contractual
agreements): opposition to a particular policy is
limited in scope and intensity (or is unreasoned), and
opposition does not stem from those specially impacted
by the policy. Consensus does not mean unanimity or
even that a particular percentage of those voting have
agreed to a particular policy. Rather, it means that
there is very substantial support for the policy and
very good reason to override any remaining dissent."

As we look at the WSIS process, we currently see the
U.S. on one side of the debate and the rest of the
world on the other side.  The consensus view does not
at the moment support the U.S. position.  

The big question is this:  "Will the U.S. government
honor Internet tradition and accept what appears to be
a worldwide consensus, or not?"

--- RBHauptman@xxxxxxx wrote:

>  
> This is so confusing I have no Idea if you are
> agreeing or disagreeing with  
> me.
>  
> So England and the moron Blair agrees with our moron
> Bush, who cares?   They 
> were both dead wrong.  And arrogant.
>  
> In your behalf I will change my original thesis, the
> United States AND  
> England are arrogant fools. 
>  
> And the fact that we give lots of money is
> irrelevant.  We are still  
> arrogant.  And much of the world still hates us.
>  
> Have a nice day....
>  
> _hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxxx
> (mailto:hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx)  said:
> <<Perhaps i do not know what arrogance means but, i
> do not believe  in means;
> Giving more aid to other countries than the rest of
> the world  combined.
> Transferring the "control" of the internet from
> government to a  quasi-public 
> entity.
> Throwing the full weight of the Pac Fleet into
> rescue  efforts after a 
> Tsunami.
> Obtaining the right to vote and go to school for 
> "gazillions" of women for 
> the first time in known history.
> WWII comes to mind  as something not arrogant, as my
> Dierker ancestors, 
> gassed or luckily saved  would know. 
> 
> But back to the internet Mr. Hauptman, you criticize
>  but what is your 
> alternative plan on behalf of your "bazillion"
> California  constituents?
> 
> As for Countries you should have noticed while 
> reciting the wars in Iraq and 
> Afghan that you were writing in line with an 
> Englishman, whos country is one 
> hundred percent allied with "America" in such 
> endeavors and who's trade 
> treaties together help form the basis for the global
>  communications networks that 
> make this net and ecommerce work globally.
> Which  was following a line by a good Frenchman
> Jefsey who basically has 
> always held we  should work within the existing
> structure while perfecting 
> alternatives  internationally. And he sat on the
> GAC. 
> 
> Read some ICANN history  and see just how captured
> the workings are by US 
> interests. Chairman of the  board is a good place to
>  start.
> 
> Chau,
> Eric>>
> 
> 
>  
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com