At 4:15 PM +0000 8/7/16, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Yes, GAC is where the multi-lateralists play hardball against multi-
>> stakeholderism at ICANN, and it's valuable to have someone who already
>> knows that game in deep detail so as to anticipate (or at least quickly
>> recognize) their moves and prepare timely response from a pre-existing
>>bag of
>> tricks.
>
>This assertion is not quite right, Dan, and I think we might all benefit
>from a clarification.
>(I can't help being an educator! ;-)
>
>Actually most of the individuals who represent governments in GAC think of
>themselves as full supporters of the multistakeholder model. Indeed, after
>working in the ICANN environment for years they become, relative to other
>governments, supporters of the ICANN regime. It's just that within that
>model, they want GAC to be more powerful or perhaps at least as powerful,
>than other stakeholder groups. The distinction is important because the
>main battle in Internet critical resources has never really been whether
>ITU or some intergovernmental agency will "take over" what ICANN does. The
>real issue has always been whether governments will "take over" or
>dominate ICANN.


Thanks Milton, always happy to be further educated.

Still, this seems sort of odd to me: GAC govt reps "supporting MSM" but
then trying to get more policy influence for governments, which are
intrinsically "lateral" by definition.  (It's not about giving ITU formal
power over ICANN, but making GAC its own substitute for ITU.  But that
substitution seems problematic in itself -- maybe even more concerning
because of its direct placement in ICANN's policy formulation dynamics.
But I guess GAC has less well-defined institutional dynamics than ITU.  Is
that the difference you're getting at? -- I'm no expert on ITU either...)

Or, are we now considering governments "stakeholders" too?  If so, why not
just make GAC a garden-variety SG in GNSO?  The "GSG" -- Government
Stakeholder Group?

I may not be expert in the implications of the term of art "multilateral"
but I honestly don't see much difference in ICANN being whip-tailed by GAC
or ITU if the dynamic is comparable.  Can you elaborate on this distinction?