<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">+1 - can't really add much... my sense is the same for ISOC post SLC 2001<br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 6:13 PM Karl Auerbach <<a href="mailto:karl@cavebear.com">karl@cavebear.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I like your story.<br>
<br>
I have been involved with ICANN since before it was formed.<br>
<br>
In that swirling of events around the formation of ICANN there was a <br>
bright belief and requirement that ICANN be structured, after a short <br>
initial interim organizational period, so that it would be controlled by <br>
the community of internet users.<br>
<br>
But as we look on the ICANN today only a small splinter remains of that <br>
obligation. And that small relic was regained only through long and <br>
hard work and over much opposition.<br>
<br>
Much of this is reflected in our 2009 report at <br>
<a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-alac-review-09jun09-en.pdf" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-alac-review-09jun09-en.pdf</a> <br>
Take a look at my "concurrence" that begins on page 33.<br>
<br>
Today's ICANN is an epitome of a regulatory body captured by those who <br>
it purports to regulate.<br>
<br>
In the 20+ years since ICANN was formed not even one new organization <br>
has chosen to model itself upon ICANN.<br>
<br>
This thread of e-mails mentions the year 2000 elections. I am certain <br>
that there will arise at least one voice that tries to besmirch that event.<br>
<br>
One should not forget that ICANN has a long held allergy to elections, <br>
and even to the word "election" itself. ICANN, or rather the law firm <br>
that created ICANN, fears what are some reasonable obligations that are <br>
triggered by organizational elections. The list of those obligations, <br>
as well as ICANN's dance of evasion, is visible in ICANN's own 1999 <br>
document: <br>
<a href="http://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/santiago/membership-analysis.htm" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/santiago/membership-analysis.htm</a><br>
<br>
The year 2000 elections were an initial attempt to organize an election, <br>
or to use ICANN's word, a "selection".<br>
<br>
For an first-time effort that election went reasonably well.<br>
<br>
There are those who will focus on the difficulties or problems of that <br>
election - not unlike a new parent who obsesses on the disruption, mess, <br>
and noise of a new baby yet fails to remember that that child represents <br>
a new human, and new person, a new potential, coming into the world.<br>
<br>
It is easy to forget some of the events of that election:<br>
<br>
An electorate formed quickly without ICANN support or funding - <br>
ultimately there were, if I remember correctly, well more than 200,000 <br>
voters who tried to register to participate (many could not consummate <br>
their registrations because ICANN's registration system was an abysmal <br>
failure of design, implementation, and operation.)<br>
<br>
There was a robust campaign and debate in the North American region <br>
(less so in other regions.) My own campaign platform is still online at <br>
<a href="https://www.cavebear.com/archive/icann-board/platform.htm" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.cavebear.com/archive/icann-board/platform.htm</a> (I still hew <br>
to most of that platform with the exception of my mistaken view of Louis <br>
Touton, a man who I came to know as one of the bright lights of ICANN.)<br>
<br>
The entire process was disrupted by at least one ICANN-related person. <br>
And there was general institutional hostility (by ICANN) against the <br>
process once the ballot was opened to allow candidates not chosen by <br>
ICANN's "nominating" committee.<br>
<br>
There were some problems with those elections. But in general they were <br>
a success.<br>
<br>
The problems that did occur could have been addressed on the next round <br>
that would have occurred two or three years later. But that opportunity <br>
was lost and destroyed.<br>
<br>
If ICANN is to survive as anything more than a regulatory relic it needs <br>
to return to its root conception as a body that is unambiguously <br>
controlled by the public for whose benefit it purports to exist.<br>
<br>
--karl--<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
At-Large mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large</a><br>
<br>
At-Large Official Site: <a href="http://atlarge.icann.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://atlarge.icann.org</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</blockquote></div></div>