I choose not to personalize. Change by individuals handpicked by ICANN staff? Who voted them in?
On Thursday, October 17, 2013, McTim wrote:
Alex,
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Alex Gakuru <gakuru@gmail.com> wrote:
> Its interesting and frustrating as well. ICANN system architects design it
> to choke global public interest while fronting an "open participation"
> façade.
> when in reality it is controlled by an over represented bunch of
> Intellectual Property private interests
Can you name one person on any of these panels that represents IP interests?
and their handsomely rewarded
> 'activists'.
>
> Let's face it, infuriates to see some Africans pipers "participating"
> motivated by promises of air tickets and some travel allowances thus go
> there to sing a pre-set tune chorus tune -- praising whomever calls the tune
> and pays the piper.
I thought they were there to actually change the tune!
--
Cheers,
McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
>
> Thoroughly associate myself with Prof. Milton Mueller on below.
>
> regards,
>
> Alex
>
> --------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>
> Date: Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Fadi's strategy panels
> To: Jorge Amodio <jmamodio@gmail.com>, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org>
> Cc: "ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org" <ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org>
>
>
> Ignore them, and they will go away.
>
> These panels not only have no legitimacy, there is really no clear
> explanation for why we need them and what they will do that meets a need
> defined by CANN's actual constituencies and communities.
>
> The idea that a group of 6 people led by someone who has never spent a
> minute in ICANN's process or in the formulation or analysis of DNS policy is
> going to make major reforms in process strikes me as especially ridiculous.
>
> --MM
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> This is an interesting debate Gakuru, especially now that Brazil
>> announced plans to build their own internet after the Snowden affair.
>> ICANN through Fadi saw it fit to have a high level Internet Governance
>> meeting with the representatives of BRICS to allay fears over the
>> US-centric internet and demonstrate that they are dedicated to the
>> Multistakeholder approach. The civil society more prominently IGC are
>> ensuring that they are well represented and that they also get to set
>> the agenda of that meeting. But it has been noted that since President
>> Rousseff will be running for re-election just about that time, she
>> might not be upto the task.
>>
>> It will be interesting to see how things will shape up.
>>
>> On 16/10/2013, Alex Gakuru <gakuru@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Read alongside:A blueprint for the future oversight of ICANN
>> > ...
>> > We respectfully suggest that the Rio meeting must *not* be organized as
>> > a
>> > parade of ”leaders” on a podium purporting to speak for the public. Let
>> > the
>> > meeting be open to anyone and everyone with a serious stake in the
>> > accountability of ICANN and its relationship to the U.S. and other
>> > governments. Let it have an open process for submitting, deliberating
>> > upon
>> > and expressing support for or opposition to specific proposals. Let us
>> > also
>> > not forget that ICANN and its oversight are the main topic of the
>> > meeting,
>> > which suggests that ICANN’s staff should not be playing a major role in
>> > setting the agenda for the meeting; ICANN has a bit of a conflict of
>> > interest in that regard. We must not allow ICANN to use its escape from
>> > the
>> > USG to escape all accountability. Ideas should be solicited widely, not
>> > from an assemblage of leaders hand-picked by the institution being
>> > governed. Let any dialogue on transition emerge openly from civil
>> > society,
>> > industry and governments and let them determine their own representation
>> > in
>> > the Rio event. That is the essence of “bottom up, multistakeholder”
>> > governance.
>> > ..
>> >
>> > http://www.internetgovernance.org/2013/10/16/a-blueprint-for-the-future-oversight-of-icann/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >