Agree Avri. On 12/09/2016 16:27, avri doria wrote: > Hi, > > I think it is not as of date as you think, but it is backwards. > > At ITU Council just last year there were suggestions that the ITU needed > to discuss names and numbers because of the US control. This was > stopped in its tracks largely because this transition was ongoing. > > If the oversight transition is thwarted by the US because of Heritage > and its fellow travelers, I expect action to start up again in ITU > council. Some may laugh at the possibility as Bill says, but some are > still yearning. And I expect they are planning on the failure their > unwitting allies in the opposition to stewardship transition are trying > to hand them. > > In a sense just the possibility of stewardship transition has stopped > such talk, but only also long as we follow-up ad deliver. > > avri > > > > On 12-Sep-16 10:24, William Drake wrote: >> Unresolved Concerns >> A. The Transition Won’t Stop an ITU Takeover >> >> That’s point number 1? Seriously? I cannot believe this ten years out >> of date nonsense is trotted out in the Heritage paper. People at the >> ITU would find it extremely amusing. >> >> Very depressing moment, >> >> Bill >> >>> On Sep 12, 2016, at 16:07, Mueller, Milton L <[log in to unmask] >>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Paul Rosenzweig [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >>> >>> Don’t you believe the Board when it promises that the accountability >>> changes will happen no matter what the transition? >>> >>> >>> MM: Mostly, Paul, I don’t believe you or other opponents of the >>> transition when they say they favor a transition but want it delayed. >>> As you know, I don’t believe a period of abeyance is a viable option. >>> If the transition is shot down during this administration and we have >>> to wait for a new one, everything we have agreed to do as part of the >>> transition is up in the air. It could all be completely changed by a >>> new NTIA head giving us new criteria, or a new Congress passing new >>> restrictions or requirements in order to appeal to deluded and >>> uninformed rightwing constituencies. Whatever happens would depend >>> entirely on U.S. domestic politics. >>> >>> I also know that many aspects of the revised bylaws simply cannot go >>> into effect until the NTIA contract is gone, so disrupting that >>> effectively sends us back to the drawing board. >>> >>> You know this as well as I do, Paul, please stop being disingenuous >>> about your support for the transition. As far as I can tell, you want >>> the US government to stay in control of the DNS. Full stop. If that’s >>> not true, I look forward to seeing Heritage as an organization or you >>> as an individual publicly challenge the dishonest and manipulative >>> statements issued by Senator Cruz and WSJ columnist L. Gordon >>> Crovitz. It seems you want to have it both ways, feign support for >>> the transition but align yourself with irrational politicians who are >>> seizing on this issue to fearmonger, whip up nationalistic fervor and >>> attack the Obama administration for purely partisan purposes. Time to >>> distance yourself from that nonsense, else completely lose >>> credibility in this group. >>> >>> Dr. Milton L Mueller >>> Professor, School of Public Policy <http://spp.gatech.edu/> >>> Georgia Institute of Technology >>> Internet Governance Project >>> http://internetgovernance.org/ >> ************************************************ >> William J. Drake >> International Fellow & Lecturer >> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ >> University of Zurich, Switzerland >> [log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> (direct), [log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> (lists), >> www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org> >> ************************************************ >> > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus -- -------------- Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 771 2472987