Tue Nov 21 01:31:02 EST 2000
MDR2K...just the low points
roving_readers can read about the banal and bourgie TLDs ICANN
approved elsewhere; here's a first (and maybe last) stab at documenting
some of the more egregious aspects of the November 2000 LA "ICANNdex."
Three boardmembers (Triana, Capdeboscq,
Conrades) were truant during ICANN's "historic" decision, with no
explanation forthcoming from ICANN. Small wonder: the three absences, in
conjunction with the four recusals (Blokzijl, Abril i
Abril, Davidson, Crew) left only 12 out of 19
boardmembers voting on the new TLDs. ICANN's bylaws state that any
action "that substantially affect[s] the operation of the Internet or
third parties require[s] a majority of sitting Board members"
(IV.1.iii.3b) -- that is, ten votes. Hence Chief Parliamentary
Officer Andrew McLaughlin's intervention
during the vote on Afilias's proposal (which fell short with only 8
votes) that the board was really only taking a "straw poll," not
establishing consensus (RealFnord @ 2:56). You got that right: Afilias's
.info TLD was passed in contravention of ICANN's bylaws, with only 8
out of 19 boardmembers supporting it.
Recusals and not, part 2
Three of the four recused boardmembers ignored Vint Cerf's suggestion
that they join the audience during discussion of the proposed TLDs (Cerf
specifically exempted Amadeu Abril i Abril due to his weak vision).
On the day before the final vote, allegedly recused Boardmember Abril
i Abril went out of his way to torpedo the ICFTU's .union proposal:
I have personally some reservations about the restricted TLD concept. It
is great -- it [permits there are problems from many parts?] but it
creates lots of problems in other senses. For one thing, we have to
decide what the hell "relevant community" means -- and this is a
kind of political assessment that's well beyond ICANN's capacities
[unintelligible] willingness. I would say something here because, well,
this is one of my jobs in ICANN. There are a lot of things that are
[going on underneath?], I got lots of calls and mail, and then I don't
see that in the public forum. Many people have expressed to me strong
reservations about the International Conspiration [sic] of Free Trade
Unions [in London?] because this historically was the, how you say that,
the arm of the gun of a certain view of the world, and in continental
Europe and in Latin America there was some astonishment, even if I think
it was more historical than present, in my personal opinion... [
Toward the end of his presentation for .xxx/.kids, ICM Registry rep
Derek Newman noted that "the
gentleman to your right, Esther" -- the sort-of-recused Robert Blokzijl -- "seemed to nod
in disagreement, and I'm curious as to what his viewpoint and question is."
Dyson stammered back: "He's...he's recused." The Lanzmannesque lingering
camera shot on Blokzijl was one of the few intriguing moments captured
by the Berkman cinematographers (@1:54).
A last-minute change of venue prevented the Berkman staff from
documenting the stunning IANA - ccTLD meeting in which a parade
of luminaries -- notably ISOC NZ's Peter Dengate Thrush, the Virgin Island NIC's Pete de Blanc, and NomiNet's Willie Black -- read ICANN the
ExecSum: ICANN's established pattern of posting crucial materials at
the last-minute, its bogus attempt to invoice the ccTLDs to the tune of
$1.35 million (see ICANN's "Audited
Financial Report for Fiscal Year Ending 30 June 2000 [Notes to Financial
Statements]," 2[c]), and its provocative and destabilizing "Discussion
Draft of Letter to Governments Regarding ccTLD Managers", led the ccTLD
registry constituency to set forth three options for the ccTLDs'
relationship to ICANN:
- a fourth Supporting Organization within ICANN
- a quasi-independent body similar to the GAC
- an independent organization
Their decision depends in large part on whether ICANN persists in its
plan to ask national governments whether they are "satisfied" with their
current ccTLD delegation. If ICANN does, Pete de Blanc warned, the
ccTLDs may "go nuclear" -- that is, establish a second root.
If any roving_readers know of any audio or video of this
session, please let me know.
Misc, always misc...
Andrew "the Jackal" McLaughlin dismisses Sunday 12 November
Membership At Large self-organization meeting as an effort "to
hijack a process for political ends" (RealFnord @ 37:10)... ASO (Astroturf Supporting organization)
boardmember Jonathan Cohen reveals intense interest in
anything past "sunrise" by nodding off^W^W lobbying heavily for ".zzz"
during the Wednesday afternoon TLD dog-and-pony show... Afilio-Names
Council Chairmodel and roving_regular Ken Stubbs wears his
conflict-of-interestophilia in your face, flaks for iDomains proposal (@ 24:20)... .Nom Consortium presenter
slags ICANN's "highly
flawed process" to heavy applause (@ 1:08:40); The Dyson Strikes
Back, responding, "I'm really sorry we gave you the chance to speak
and you did not take very good advantage of it" (@ 1:11). Still
unsatisfied, Dearly Departing Dyson snipes,
"I don't want to be part of the conspiracy to shorten the public comment
period" (@ 2:20) -- evidently forgetting that she presided for months
over an asymptotic schedule that ended up costing applicants
$277.78/second... Paul Garrin admits "quite
honestly I haven't counted how many" gTLDs his Name.Space proposed
(@ 42:47), that it was "difficult" to raise $50K (@ 50:05); to Garrin's
admirable defense of free speech, the Doyenne titters, "Off the top of my head,
the IP [Intellectual Property] constituency did not select you as one of
their choices" (@ 47:40)... Careful study of body language reveals Dyson
doesn't much fancy the litigious, as
she put it, "Image... Online... Design..." (@ 29:55)...
Clarification: A regular roving_source to whom we are deeply
indebted points out that Cohen is a DNSO boardmember, not, as the above
remarks seemed to suggest, an ASO boardmember.