Re: "The core Internet institutions abandon the US Government"

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Dave Crocker <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 10/12/2013 5:25 AM, John Levine wrote:
>
>> ICANN has a long running fantasy that they are a global
>> multi-stakeholder organization floating above mere politics, and not a
>> US government contractor incorporated as a California non-profit.
>>
>
>
> What's most interesting about your sentence is that both parts are phrased
> in a manner that mostly misses any of the interesting issues about ICANN,
> and tends to focus the reader on misperceptions and irrelevancies.


You know there is absolutely nothing in the above that could not be stated
as '-1'.

If you can't give a proof point or an explanation then don't bother to say
it. John made a factual statement that is true in every important respect.
If you disagree with those fact then explain why.

When people try to slap others down in that fashion, I get annoyed.

And I get really annoyed when people talk about important issues that they
don't state. Which suggests that the writer is too important to explain
them to the lesser beings he is talking at.


The view from the establishment is that ICANN is US property and that is
both the US establishment and Russia, China, Brazil and pretty much
everywhere else.

The reason that quite a few folk don't want to move ICANN functions into
the UN instead is that nobody trusts them either. In fact the group that
would be in charge is a bit like the old human rights committee which used
to be populated with representatives of the worst abusers because they were
the ones who cared most.


-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/