Re: [ga] The Future of Domain Registry Pricing, if left uncapped
Veni Markovski wrote: At 11:39 AM 09.8.2006 '?.' -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote:Wd got off to a good start in year 2000. We had a real election for ICANN board seats. A. I for one, do not "know what happened in China and Japan". I have heard rumors of corporations pushing their employees to vote for certain candidates. All I know is that that region elected a fine and capable elected director. B. What's wrong if one article in a magazine results in voters changing their minds or reinforcing their decisions? Magazines do not have any form of mind control over voters. So I guess it was a rather persuasive article. C. I don't know whether an East European would be elected or not. But I do know for a certainty that no European, west or east, will ever be elected today or in the future - for the simple reason that ICANN has taken away from *every* European the power to vote for an ICANN director. We ought not to forget that there were highly disruptive forces at play during the 2000 election. ICANN deployed a registration system that was deeply technically flawed. (One, particularly one who is a director on ICANN's board, might find it more than extremely interesting to look to what the people who built and oversaw that system are doing today. Let me mention the word "patronage".) ICANN's solution, nominating committees, is a highly paternalistic response that says to the community of internet users "we say unto you that you are not able to properly use a voting franchise, so we will take that power out of your hands." Can you conceive of a device better suited to result in a diminished opinion of ICANN than its exclusion of the community of internet users? --karl--
|