or baskets to put them in
for that matter since ICANN controls those as well.
In the course of the last
few months I have observed so many new people posting on this board due to the horrendous
behavior of Afilias, Neulevel and ICANN. I commend many here who have tirelessly
continued to fight for what is right. I canít imagine the numbers who have been ripped
off by this process who have not come forward unfortunately but Iím sure they are
Enough time has now passed, so for those of you who still hold hope
that Afilias and ICANN will do what's right you need to get over it and review your
options and look to revive this horse elsewhere. While all these posts are very important
and the truth needs to be heard they fall on deaf ears if it's ICANN or Afilias you
are trying to communicate with.
Thankfully though these posts are not a loss
as they help to educate the uninformed and they serve as a record to document the
sad state of events, which brings me to my point.
With all the effort exerted
here time and again stating the same facts you might want to consider spending a
small amount of time writing to either of the Committees below or both. In case you
were unaware over the last year these committees have held some hearings on ICANN
and they do not like what they are observing especially the Committee on Energy and
Whose to say it will matter but who is to say it doesn't but unlike
ICANN at least Congress is beginning to acknowledge that there is a problem but if
you do nothing you can be certain of one thing, nothing will change.
committees have heard from ICANN, affected companies and others it's about time they
hear it from those who come from the largest segment of the ICANN injured, You the
Attempting to understand all there is to know about ICANN is a confusing
task and that's the way they like it however if you consider the picture in a simple
way it's all very clear.
The"FOX HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO GUARD THE HENHOUSE" best
describes it and never before can I recall such a fitting example.
is not the best analogy but I hope that the point I am attempting is conveyed.
would things be like if the top branches of the FAA were run by executives in the
Airline industry and only for their benefit all the time?
What would things be
like if the USDA was run by for all intent purposes the same executives from the
industry they are supposed to oversee?
This is basically how ICANN is structured.
Itís an absurdity.
The US Government made a big mistake and whether intentional
or not is another question entirely, however it's about time this mistake be corrected,
by now the mistake has lost any claims of innocence, in fact during the creation
of ICANN the government would not grant their endorsement of ICANN until certain
changes were made that called for half of the ICANN directors to be truly representative
of Internet users, it is easy to ascertain that the reasoning behind this would be
to counterbalance the obvious biased corporate interests in ICANN.
be construed, as the good intentions on part of the government then are now very
questionable because the "good intentions" now ring hollow, as it never came with
any teeth. The government and to be clear, The Department of Commerce has stood
by and have done absolutely nothing to insure the commitment would be honored.
question the fears the government held that compelled them to seek a balanced board
from the start are the same fears that have become a reality today. How incompetent
of the government to believe the promises of ICANN thinking they could be trusted
to be honest and act without bias in honoring the commitment that half the board
would be publicly elected. This is not in ICANNís self-interest and since the government
has lacked the will for whatever reason to compel them to honor the commitment directly
relates why the public is without a necessary and effective voice today. Hence the
reason for the public screwing past and present. What illuminates the absurdity further
is if and when this commitment is honored many of the major decisions would have
already been made and those affected by them will suffer them for an unknown amount
The fact is the structure should have been properly put in place first
that should have been the most important goal and ICANN should have been forced to
comply before being allowed to undertake any other issues. Purposely backwards!
and by virtue of reading former CEO Mike Roberts Senate Testimony it is all to clear
the perception and lack of respect ICANN holds for the public. The excuse he provides
to why the commitment has not been met is basically because ICANN is unable to find
a solution to get the job done all this mind you on pseudo fears. Stall Tactics!
Odd that ICANN knew how to institute and subject the world to the flawed UDRP,
increase their pay (did you know there are those making 100-300 grand a year!), pick
their insider cronies and the established players as the recipients of the new tlds,
invent new policy while claiming it old, grant Verisign a new contract essentially
protecting the monopoly ICANN was charged with breaking, and whatever other F-cked
up thing you want to add, but when it comes down to the At Large they feign ignorance
and in the tradition of the dishonest organization they have proven themselves to
be they commission a study that dare consider if an At Large is worth implementing,
all while blowing or more likely laundering $450,000, consider this an equally prime
example of the
"FOX BEING ALLOWED TO GUARD THE HENHOUSE".
Let's see commission
a study done by a committee that includes people connected to ICANN and wallaaa all
is safe for democracy. Suuuuuuurrrree. If this wasn't so ridiculous it would be tragic,
actually it's ridiculously tragic.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce
ICANN's New Generation of Internet Domain Name Selection Process Thwarting Competition?"
on Telecommunications and the Internet February 8, 2001
ICANN's Process For Selecting New TLD's
Renegotiation Of A 1999 Contract Between Verisign And ICANN
2417, the Dot Kids Name Act of 2001.
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the
November 1, 2001 10:00 AM
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
ICANN Governance, February
Here is something for you to consider.Karl Auerbach an ICANN Director elected
by the At large and someone closest you will find to be representative of the public
makes it clear in his Senate testimony that although on the Board of Directors of
ICANN is treated as an OUTSIDER and is cut off from information furthermore his testimony
contrasts that of former CEO Mike Roberts.
If you look at the links below starting
with the first you will notice that Mr. Auerbach's testimony is suspiciously absent
from being posted alongside the others whose testimony is posted from any Congressional
So much for this being an open and transparent organization, huh
might think this observation is reaching and doesn't say much. It doesn't have to
say much but what it does say it says loud and clear, No need for me to spell it
This goes out to the posters Richard and Rachael but really anyone reading
I noticed your numerous references to Afilias Board members taking advantage
such as Hal Lubsen
Where you aware that Ken Stubbs former chair of the Names
Council of ICANN is a partner in Domain Bank with bad ole' Lubsen. They also take
(I would use serve but it's not fitting) together on the executive committee of Core?
you wondered the why's about things it comes as no surprise when you connect the
dots that lead to whois
You might find the dots interesting in the post at the
The Past Predicted the Present
ICANN Defraud: The Fraud of the ICANN New TLD Process.
My post has fallen prey I see to what I have pointed out about others beating
a certain horse, Oh well ROFLMAO
There are only two conceivable ways that might
cause the needed changes one from a lawsuit that is effective enough that is causes
repercussions or the other getting Congress to act.
Unless you plan on filing
suit do the next best thing and let Congress know. If they do nothing then when the
shit hits the fan they canít claim they were caught unaware. Election day comes around
every so often or so they tell me.