[At-Large] my submissions to new gTLD statement

[JFC Morfin]

At 21:39 09/01/2009, Franck Martin wrote:
>And your views are tainted by a desire of having ICANN to fail, so 
>you too have a conflict of Interest, but I think it makes a good 
>equilibrium on the list.
>
>on another note: we do not live in a perfect world. I think comes a 
>time, when someone has to say, enough consultations and let's do it. 
>The economist likes to publish rating of countries based on how easy 
>it is to do business in these countries because how slow is the 
>administration.

This is ICANN precautionary duty. ICANN plays its survival. There is 
no mystery: if ICANN's Internet for the Rich strategy fails there 
will be an international recovery alternative, which may take one 
year. But that recovery will most probably not be an ICANN plan B 
[which is not even considered], and - I am sure of it - will not keep 
ICANN in the way it sees itself today.

The question for us (lead and end users) is: what is the worst case?
- the collapse of the Internet for the Rich,
- or the ICANN continuation.

Until to six months ago I would have said: the collapse. Today I am 
obliged to say the ICANN continuation: they are those who have chosen 
to support the single virtual root, the money oriented Internet for 
the Rich strategy rather than a QoS  oriented multilaterally 
concerted strategy.

"tant va la cruche à l'eau ..."
jfc