Return to Proposed Revisions to NSI Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: Merlin
Date/Time: Thu, March 1, 2001 at 9:32 PM GMT
Browser: Netscape Communicator V4.08 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: The Public Comments are a Sham


   The Public Comments are Sham. They provide this forum so they can trick Congress into believing they are transparent and that they represent the consensus of the Internet community. This is untrue of course. It is apparent they are on course to do as they wish otherwise why not a public comments period before these aggreements were even considered?
Just when you though ICANN coudn't possibly be more arrogant in their contempt of the Internet community they hand us this.
Congress must be made aware. Rememeber more hearings of ICANN are forthcoming

ICANN's consensus is derived basically from the supporting organizations where big business stakeholders hold the power.

Remember Mr. Ken Stubbs former Chairman of the Names Council of the DNSO who as it so happens is also the Chairman of Afilias the company chosen to operate .info. Why hasn't ICANN addressed the Conflict of Interest?

Proposed .org Registry Agreement

4.3 Manner of Establishment of New and Revised Specifications and Policies.

4.3.1 "Consensus Policies" are those specifications or policies established based on a consensus among Internet stakeholders represented in the ICANN process, as demonstrated by (a) action of the ICANN Board of Directors establishing the specification or policy, (b) a recommendation, adopted by at least a two-thirds vote of the council of the ICANN Supporting Organization to which the matter is delegated, that the specification or policy should be established, and (c) a written report and supporting materials (which must include all substantive submissions to the Supporting Organization relating to the proposal) that (i) documents the extent of agreement and disagreement among impacted groups, (ii) documents the outreach process used to seek to achieve adequate representation of the views of groups that are likely to be impacted, and (iii) documents the nature and intensity of reasoned support and opposition to the proposed policy.



Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy