NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Non-Commercial User Constituency <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 29 Mar 2010 07:25:54 -0300
Reply-To:
"Carlos A. Afonso" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From:
"Carlos A. Afonso" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
I think it is worse --joining some recent facts together (including the
sad acts of the ombusdman, the whole story of staff manipulation of the
NCSG process the staff-led involvement of Icann in areas which are not
part of its mandate etc), I conclude Icann (which means staff and some
board members) is getting closer to a kind of dictatorship which creates
democratic façades just to demolish them if results are not of the
dictator's liking.

--c.a.

Milton L Mueller wrote:
> In a bad development, ICANN's lawyers are attempting to brush aside its only real external accountability mechanism, the Independent Review Process (IRP). As you know, ICANN lost its IRP challenge on the .xxx top level domain.
> 
> Instead of accepting this decision and conforming to it, ICANN is asking for public comment on whether it should accept the decision (simple answer: YES); it is also suggesting that the applicant would have to go through an entirely new "review process" to get the domain that was unfairly denied it five years ago. The proposed process for the "review" looks like it was designed by a crazy man - there is a clear attempt here to deny justice through perpetual process cycling.
> 
> 
> 
> The comment period on this travesty is now open:  http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-26mar10-en.htm
> 
> I urge all NCSC members to comment along the following lines:
> 
> 
> 
> *         ICANN must respect the decision of the IRP panel.
> 
> *         ICANN has no justification for starting a de novo review process when its review panel has already decided that it acted in an unfair and discriminatory manner. To do so is to prolong the injustice.
> 
> *         ICANN has no business asking the GAC - or any other Advisory Committee - for political advice, it simply needs to conform to the IRP decision
> 
> Please don't allow ICANN to pretend that the public doesn't want it to be accountable. Comment on this proposal!
> 
> --MM
> 

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: [log in to unmask]
====================================

ATOM RSS1 RSS2