Re: [ga] Astroturfing the new gTLDs comment forum

[JFC Morfin <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 23:01 22/08/2007, Danny Younger wrote:
> It looks like the Keep the Core Neutral Campaign has
> started to astroturf the new gTLDs comment forum.
>
> The Campaign had a nicely written petition at
> http://www.keep-the-core-neutral.org/petition that has
> already been signed by a number of parties.  That
> should have been sufficient.
>
> Do we really need to wallpaper a forum just to get a
> point across to the ICANN board?

Danny,
the problem is the lack of clarity regarding the nature of ICANN. 
Today ICANN is made of the members of a selected BoD who either claim 
they represent themselves (together with their appointed non 
controled Australian inculturated Staff) or they strive to appreciate 
if there is a non-defined style consensus on a case per case basis.

In the case they represent themsleves it is important that in the 
archives there is the record of a larger number of disagreeing 
parties. In the case they claim there is a consensus of any sort 
there is a need to show that a significant part of the informed 
parties opposed that claim.

It is also important that the e-mail origin is recorded. To show the 
reality of the opposition. And also the openness of the process. The 
worst thing after ICANN meddling in mission creep issues, is that 
people start building another internet, as I do.

The only reason why I think I am legitimate is that I try to build it 
atop the existing, one what can only confort the good things and 
probably ruin the bad ones - except if ICANN wants to carry layer 
violations, entering areas I provide other technical ways to enter.

This is not a trivial issue because the current state of the world is 
that users build their own "metacoms" network. Actually, everyone 
does it for centuries, but before computers and the Internet, we 
never realised it because we used human agents (scribes, secretary, 
postmen, translators, etc.) where we now use computer agents we can 
program along our own needs and preferences. So, when I say I build 
another Internet, I just say that I built and develop a model of the 
way all this works and people behaves: this may helps catalyzing 
developments or blocking errors when needed. The way 
keep-the-core-neutral people act is the same way I had to engage into 
at the IETF. For similar reasons.

Unfortunately this kind of hard-keep-the-core technique is the only 
one left by the ICANN, IETF biased consensus model. Now, I repeat 
that what would be great would be a tool permitting to crawl though 
mail archive and to rebuild the entire threat without duplicate and 
good crisp formating. This would certainly help surving me or other 
serious people's weak to strong strategies.

Cheers.
jfc