NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Melanie Penagos <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Melanie Penagos <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 24 May 2016 14:43:53 -0400
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2112 bytes) , text/html (4 kB)
Hi McTim,

The civil society statement of support for the IANA Transition can be found
here: http://bestbits.net/iana-transition/

All the best,

Melanie

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:37 PM, McTim <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Edward Morris <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>> HI McTim,
>>
>>
>> Although I might be surprised, I doubt the NCSG will have a consensus on
>> an approach to the transition.
>>
>> I strongly support the Heritage approach to the transition. It should be
>> noted that Brett made it very clear that he supports the transition. I
>> believe the words he used, words that seem to have confused a few people
>> here, were "I support the transition".  It's just that his position, IMHO,
>> takes a far more mature, sophisticated and nuanced approach to the matter
>> than the speed racer approach  espoused during the Senate hearing by our
>> commercial colleagues.
>>
>> From the perspective of the noncommercial commiunity, the soft graduated
>> transition is the better option for two very specific reasons:
>>
>> 1. In creating an accountable ICANN we reinvented the corporation.
>>
>
> We didn't, it is just tinkering around the edges.
>
>
>
>> Our new corporate model is untried, untested and is a completely new
>> construction without precedent.
>>
>
> As was ICANN in the earliest days.
>
>
>
>> Many of us in the NCSG preferred a membership model based upon California
>> statute that had greater certainty. Our views were rejected. I don't know
>> if the model we have created will actually work as intended. No one does.
>> This was so rushed
>>
>
> In fact is has been delayed for many years....not "rushed".
>
> There is a letter circulating amongst CS folks supporting the transition,
> does anyone have the link to that?
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
> indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>



-- 
*Melanie Penagos*

*International Policy Associate*
*Public Knowledge*
*http://www.publicknowledge.org/ <http://www.publicknowledge.org/>*
+1 (202) 861-0020 ext. 122 | skype: melanie.penagos | @ampenagos
<https://twitter.com/ampenagos>


ATOM RSS1 RSS2