Re: [ga] RE: Registrants Constituency

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jefsey and all,

  For one of only a few times over the past 2 years I am in
agreement with you mostly here Jefsey, and nicely
presented as well.  However, "Commanders" do not
as a matter of command, command vessels, Captains do...
"Commanders" by rank sometimes do act as Captain
on some navel vessels and are therefore necessarily
the "Captain" and addressed and considered as such...

JFC Morfin wrote:

> At 19:27 05/03/2007, Andy Gardner wrote:
> >Especially when they installed a CEO who was an ex-Navy
> >commander.  Those guys are used to taking orders from above, not listening to
> >bottom-up consensus.
>
> As myself an ex-Navy commander I am not sure of your diagnostic. I
> think I am a good example that the need in a distributed network is
> neither top-down (centralized) nor bottom-up (decentralized) but
> at-large. Please do not confuse a Colonel and a Commander. By nature
> a Colonel belong to a hierarchy. A commander is the master of a crew.
>
> We all are the commander of our own cybership (it being our business,
> our family, our laptop). This is by nature the Plato's paradigm (the
> origin of the "gouvernance" and "cybernetic" concepts).
>
> ICANN still thinks in a top-down "admiralty way" but we are not a
> fleet paid by ARPA. Joop, Danny, etc. still think as convoy
> commodores with some more important people (registrants, BC, NCUC,
> ISP, Registrars, TM holders) voting for others. But people want to
> (and will) sail their own way, heading for where they wants, doing
> what they want. Not paying much interest to all these pompous bores
> and their pseudo-democratic/rough consensual ways.
>
> However, the current technology prevents this (on purpose, please
> .... read RFC 3935! the technology is NOT the one IETF could develop,
> but the one that match the IETF leaders' core values. These core
> values are not the Human Rights [cf. IESG response to an appeal of
> mine] but decentralization. Not equal opportunity for everyone, not
> permanent addresses for all, not freedom of naming, not
> multilingualism, not IGF multilateralism.
>
> You can try hard, but you will not change that the digital ecosystem
> is distributed. That ICANN is centralized, and that the IETF
> technology is decentralized. The consequence is a necessary split. A
> split of the Internet or a split between the emergent Internet and
> the Legacy Internet (as signed at the US initiative in Tunis). Period.
>
> Now, there are always rear-guard people, trying to make obsolete
> things survive to protect their old influence or market share in the
> emergent world. This only creates rigidity. The current management of
> the namespace by ICANN will only make a smooth transition impossible.
> I tried. They do not want it. I do not think we can prevent the blow
> anymore. I only keep hoping that we will have the time to transition
> the user architecture before some commercial interest understands the
> evolution still better than Google. But this is only now a pious wish
> now. We wasted to much time.
>
> jfc

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827