RE: [IDNO:431] Re: GA as IDNO

Roeland M.J. Meyer (rmeyer@mhsc.com)
Thu, 17 Jun 1999 10:04:37 -0700


> No, let's not -- I don't want to waste my time on dogmatic fantasies.

It is a fantasy to consider any change in direction, from the ICANN, at
this point.

> I'm interested in realistic possibilities that the ICANN board might
> actually consider. They might consider modifying the General
> Assembly into a special-case constituency.

Cute, a constituency without NC representation. Won't fly.

> They might consider an
> IDNO constituency, though I think that the current effort is a lost
> cause. They may consider that the general membership of ICANN, and
> the current GA, are better places for individuals to bring their
> concerns. But they sure as hell are not going to throw out the
> entire structure of the DNSO and start all over again.

Why not? They threw out the Paris draft. But, that's because they had
their own pre-written draft ready to implace. The constiuency model is
working nicely to fragment vocal opposition. Why should they change it
now?

Yes, they need to throw out the DNSO and start over because the current
one has no consensus support. One can not have consensus by tossing out
the stakeholder group that disagrees or by trying to steam-roller them
into the pavement.

The ICANN is a train-wreck and the locomotive has already derailed.