Those (points a-c) may be symptoms, but perhaps the governance structure
is a deeper cause?

Why are there management problems?  Why is the policy such a Rube Goldberg
design?  Why has there been such delay?

Could it be that the structure doesn't actually work when put to the test?

Of course, not all changes would necessarily be productive.  It's
certainly possible to make things worse.  Witness the way NCSG was forced
into a formal constituency model.  So of course, one needs to be cognizant
of power structures that affect any new design of governance.  And since
that may be a fundamental part of the problem, it may be that ICANN cannot
fix itself purely from the inside, because that may just go in the wrong
direction, depending on who controls the new design process.

It's Pandora's Box, to be sure.  Proceed with caution.

Nevertheless, the current structure may not last indefinitely, even with a
few tweaks around the edges.

I don't have the answer here, but I do suspect the whole edifice is
uncertain, and I have increasing doubts about the long term.

Dan


-- 
Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and
do not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.



On Thu, April 19, 2012 6:45 am, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> I am not sure I agree with the premise that an implementation mistake by
> the staff constitutes grounds for completely reinventing and rethinking
> ICANN. Can someone explain the logic of that to me? For example, if the
> Capitol building of one of the world's first democracies, e.g., the USA,
> had collapsed due to incompetent construction, would it mean that we
> should re-think the nature of democracy?
>
> I think they need to fix the mistake, fire those responsible, and move on.
>
> The root of the problem, to my mind, is not the governance model but, in
> this order: a) management problems; b) the rube Goldberg-like complexity
> of the new TLD program, and c) the more than a decade-long delay in
> accepting a policy, which means that we are dealing with a sudden flood of
> 1000+ applications rather than a steady trickle of 10 or so a year, and
> which, like b), is a product of the intense politics swirling around the
> program.
>
> Remember that this has never been done before.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>>
>> ICANN needs to rethink and reorganize itself!
>>
>