[At-Large] ICANN Board Nomination
carlton.samuels at gmail.com
Mon Aug 30 23:22:09 UTC 2010
I always find your posts thought-provoking and want to hone in on your
assertion that if allocated a role with merit and strength in ICANN, there
would be an overflow of participation. Maybe you're right.
Evan outlined how dispiriting it is when those of us in At-Large - for
better or worse still a part of the deserving public - take ICANN at its
word, get involved and make meritorious suggestions after studying the
issues that are blithely ignored. Yes, we work.
I guess the fissure is a common understanding, if not perception. of what
You speak of the pre-2000 "public" with some nostalgia and implied it was a
time of great hubba-hubba in public participation.
Mind you, a lot of us who are now involved were probably not counted as part
of the deserving public then.
I daresay a lot less of us. Especially those of us at the edge of empire.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com> wrote:
> On 08/30/2010 01:01 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> > On 30 August 2010 09:29, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond<ocl at gih.com> wrote:
> > - Outreach is ultimately a shared responsibility that requires ICANN's
> > active support.
> I very much disagree.
> If ICANN allowed the public a role that had merit and strength then
> there would be an overflow of interest and participation - we saw that
> happen in year 2000.
> And we see that happen for the industrial "stakeholder" inside ICANN
> that there is no shortage of participatory people and energy. That's
> because those industrial interests have "a stake" whereas ICANN has made
> sure that natural people who use the net are over-categorized,
> over-grouped, and over-managed into impotency.
> Put the promised 50%+ of ICANN's board seats up for public election from
> slates of candidates who need pass no insider nomination process and I
> guarantee you that the public participation in ICANN would go up by many
> orders of decimal magnitude.
> ICANN's "reform" of year 2002 and 2003 was intentionally designed to
> debilitate the public in ICANN. It has worked.
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
More information about the At-Large